UESPWiki:Archive/CP Anyone else notice this?

This is an archive of past UESPWiki:Community Portal discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page, except for maintenance such as updating links.

Anyone else notice this?

I was looking at the MediaWiki website tonight and noticed this: [1]. It looks as though, excluding the 100 largest wikis in the world (mostly Wikimedia, number 1 is English Wikipedia, 2 is German Wikipedia, etc.), we are the 5th largest user of MediaWiki software. I found this interesting and decided to post it. You may also notice the CS wiki as 13th on the list. --Dylnuge 23:35, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

We need over 8,700 articles to even get on the top 120 list. [2] --Aristeo | Talk 10:32, 30 October 2006 (EST)

Basing on article count alone is not a good method of determining the largest Wiki. For example, www.gamerwiki.com has 4x the number of good articles (11000 to our 2900) but we have over 10x the number of users (5900 to 560) and over 60x the number of page views (29 million to 500,000). Or consider the English Chainki which has a ridiculus 477,000 article count but a low page view and almost no users. I've looked at a number of Wikis and found there is huge variation in the article count to actual content. The UESP has a low good article count I think because each good article is relatively large. We could artifically inflate our article by a few factors simply by splitting any page with a 2 or 3 level header, although just doing so to get on a 'largest Wiki list' is not a good reason to do so.

Actually looking at that list and not just looking at article count we're higher rated than I would of guessed. By users we're 54th, by views we're 5th (if you trust the page view values), and by edits we're 106th. While it doesn't really matter whether we're near the top or near the bottom, its interesting at any rate. -- DaveH 19:34, 3 November 2006 (EST)

We might not have the largest wiki, but we sure do have the best! --Aristeo | Talk 17:48, 9 November 2006 (EST)

Being interesting is the only real reason I mentioned this, I know a lot of factors contribute to a 'good' wiki. I found this interesting, and notice it says it excludes wikis in the top 123 available at meta. Dylnuge 16:53, 9 November 2006 (EST)