Talk:Manual for small and new Wikipedias

Archives of this page

---

2008 | 2009

Does size matter?

Alemannic Wikipedia has established a rule, that every article, which has less than 5 sentences (with relevant informations), will be deleted after two weeks. Maybe Alemannic Wikipedia has a low number when looking on articles count (today: 4418), but a high percentage of articles bigger than 2 kB (about 50%). Holder-als 14:00, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Article Placeholders

Link to Article Placeholders example does not working. WhatamIdoing, please impove link or delete this section. --Kaganer (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Anglocentrism in this essay

I found many anglocentrism　or western centrism phrases like "By the way, it might be easier to translate not from English Wikipedia but Simple English Wikipedia (Main Page), which has shorter articles." Why should it be like this? I think this could be rephrased to say instead that would be easier to translate from a bigger Wikipedia whose language is near (or also spoken in) the region in which the local/regional language is spoken. The English Wikipedia could be remain as an example fue to being the largest, but the example should be expanded.

Other I found is "Whatever decision you'll make you will pay a high price for it, in terms of internal relations. But this should be no news for you, if you are unlucky enough to be born in such places.". Why should I be unlucky to born in my home region? Shouldn't be proud of my region? Shouldn't be unlucky about the conflicts of my home region instead of about my region?

What do you think? --Zerabat (discusión) 14:44, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

I think you can feel free to edit the page. --MF-W 15:15, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Here's the diff that introduced that specific sentence, FWIW. Maybe you could work with other big contributors to the essay to properly review and amend it. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 10:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Zerabat, thank you for your comment! I must confess that I have not watched closely this page for a longer time. I very much agree with you, especially about the sentence you have marked in bold. Ziko (talk) 09:04, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

The premise of that sentence is "If your environment is politically troubled", so "unlucky" is a correct statement unless we attribute such a circumstance to a guilt (in a previous life) or a mission (again religious belief). Probably it can be expressed better, but I don't think it's anglocentric. For instance USA and UK are quite politically troubled right now and an editor wishing to write about human rights, healthcare, trade, global warming etc. certainly is "unlucky enough" in such context compared to, say, Sweden.

As for English/Simple English, it was probably mentioned as simple example of "competing" subdomains. I've added an example with German and French because I know it's something happening for real and there are certainly people understanding both languages. I don't know if Chinese or Japanese articles have a tendency to be overly verbose and unnecessarily detailed to the point of being completely useless for translation into another language, for instance; if you know other such examples to illustrate the point please add them. --Nemo 19:32, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Should this be rewritten?

If I did not misunderstand it, this extract talks as if once you create an article you are required (in the sense of obligation) to maintain it in the years to come, but edit in Wikipedia is voluntary and you are not obligated to edit.

When you make an article you create an “administrative debt”, just as when you mortgage a house. That article will require care for many years to come, and it will be you paying the debt with your own time. If you make ...

How can this be rewritten to have the right meaning? --Zerabat (discusión) 23:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)