Peter Gervai wrote:
Yep. We have ~600 articles, but they are _real_. Not
templates. Not
[...]
(All I wanted to say: article count isn't god's way to rate us. Apart from
This is of course not about "rating" a people or language per se, only
indicating the size (at a point in time) of a collection of articles.
It took me (alone) only one month to write the first 1000 articles
(real articles) in my own wiki website, so 600 articles is a very
small collection.
I'm not suggesting to remove the smaller language Wikipedias, only to
separate big from small in lists such as
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Multilingual_coordination
The Hungarian Wikipedia has gotten a late start, but I'm sure it will
soon reach 6000 and then 60,000 articles, just like German, Polish and
Swedish, so you need not worry. But I'm worried that Sami or
Kashubian will never reach 600, and I don't think we should stop them
from trying just because these languages might not have 10,000 active
speakers. When someone asks why there is no active Kashubian
Wikipedia, do you think we should answer "they tried but have not yet
succeeded" or "we have forbidden them from trying"?
And what if the Poles (46 million speakers) and Germans (140 million
speakers) would decide to set the limit at 30 million speakers instead
of 10 thousand, then both you (Hungarian, 15 million speakers) and me
(Swedish, 9 million speakers) will be in trouble.
--
Lars Aronsson (lars(a)aronsson.se)
Aronsson Datateknik -
http://aronsson.se/