[voodoo]

I don't get it. I've thought about this occationally, but I just haven't come to any logical conclusion on this subject.

Wikipedia, open to all. Yet.. is it really? The reason I wonder is the immense discrepancy between the most common languages on Wikipedia and in The Real World.

According to the front page:

English
The Free Encyclopedia
2 058 000+ articles

Deutsch
Die freie Enzyklopädie
655 000+ Artikel

Français
L’encyclopédie libre
572 000+ articles

Polski
Wolna encyklopedia
434 000+ haseł

日本語
フリー百科事典
426 000+ 記事

Nederlands
De vrije encyclopedie
372 000+ artikelen

Italiano
L’enciclopedia libera
362 000+ voci

Português
A enciclopédia livre
318 000+ artigos

Español
La enciclopedia libre
290 000+ artículos

Svenska
Den fria encyklopedin
256 000+ artiklar

What is going on here? Sure one can with some amount of patriotism accept that English is by far the most common computer language in the world, thus isn't incredible to find a staggering amount of articles in English on Wikipedia.

Let's just skip that one. Jingoism aside.

German articles more numerous than French articles. Well, ok there are a bit more Germans than French and most of the French speaking colonies are.. perhaps poor. I'm assuming this. I have no idea why they aren't writing articles on Wikipedia. German colonies? Hahahhaha.

Then comes Poland. (!) Ah.. what? What happened to Russia? More computer users in Poland than Russia? Maybe. Doubt it, but.. you know.

Now comes Japanes (I assume). Very computer literate. Yet not as computer literate as, say.. Poland? Hello?

The Netherlands come in next and then Shitaly. Finally Portugese, Spanish and.. Swedish.

There are 9 million people living in Sweden. Less than 8 of these 9 million speak Swedish.

Now let's check the number of speakers of these top 10 Wiki languages: (1st language/second language) according to Wikipedia:

1. English: 309-380/200-600 million
2. German: 100 million/28 million
3. French: 65-109 million/115-500 million
4. Polish: 43 million/neglegable
5. Japanese: 130 million/neglegable
6. Dutch: 23-30 million/neglegable
7. Italian: 62 million/neglegable
8. Portugese: 210 million/20 million
9. Spanish: 320-400 million/100 million
10. Swedish: 9 million/neglegable

So.. does anyone know how languages like Swedish, Italian, Polish and Dutch are on the top 10 list? Especially Polish. I just don't get that.

V

[peeb]

My guess is that this corresponds to the most wired countries?

[EricTheRed]

English is the trade language of the world and thus the most assessable language. At one point kione Greek was the trade language of the world. Times change.

[Chuckit]

Different countries have different overall browsing preferences. Maybe Poland appreciates Wikipedia more than Japan (incidentally, I don't think there's a single photo on the entire Japanese Wikipedia — no wonder they find it boring).

[Kevin]

This is just confirming that English is the standard when it comes to the interweb. Something we've known for awhile now.

[Ghoser777]

I've always been so grateful that English became the standard on the web. I can't imagine having the majority of the internet in a language I can't understand. So that does suck royally for all the other billions of people who don't speak English. It'd be interested to see a timeline showing the percentage of the internet represented in each language versus time.

[OreoCookie]

You forget that many articles are specific to countries.

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by Ghoser777 

I've always been so grateful that English became the standard on the web. I can't imagine having the majority of the internet in a language I can't understand. So that does suck royally for all the other billions of people who don't speak English. It'd be interested to see a timeline showing the percentage of the internet represented in each language versus time.

Heh. I hope the irony in this post was intentional.

[Mastrap]

Wikipedia is largely user created. Maybe the amount of information is directly related to the amount of work that is put into wikipedia by a community.

[Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Shitaly.

[Kevin]

Oh voodoo has spent a great deal of time belittling Italians. And other racial groups he hates on.

Why this is tolerated is beyond me.

[Mithras]

Yes, it's an interesting phenomenon actually. A friend of mine calculated the ratio of articles/users for each language -- some very minor languages scored very high, presumably because of a dedicated core of users and a sense of national/linguistic pride.

[Cold Warrior]

maybe it's just a representation of those that have something useful to say.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Oh voodoo has spent a great deal of time belittling Italians. And other racial groups he hates on.

Why this is tolerated is beyond me.

Being one quarter Polish, I'm not too thrilled with a lot of the rest of his post either.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

You forget that many articles are specific to countries.

So Poland has twice as many topics as Spain that are relevant to it?

[Oisín]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Being one quarter Polish, I'm not too thrilled with a lot of the rest of his post either.

I think he meant that Poland and Russia, being relatively comparable countries (who both happen to speak Slavic languages) ought logically to be otherwise represented on Wikipedia, since Russia has about 143 million inhabitants and Poland has about 38.

Not all that big a difference, though, I’d say.

[loki74]

Can we be certain that many of these countries don't already have equivalents that were localized from the get-go?

For example, I don't imagine there are very many MySpace users in Japan, but there are very many Mixi users there, and vice versa.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

The Netherlands come in next and then Shitaly. Finally Portugese, Spanish and.. Swedish.

You've made it clear you don't care for Italy/Italians, so give the little kid name calling a rest please.

[Railroader]

The usual racist crap from voodoo... :/

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Oisín 

I think he meant that Poland and Russia, being relatively comparable countries (who both happen to speak Slavic languages) ought logically to be otherwise represented on Wikipedia, since Russia has about 143 million inhabitants and Poland has about 38.

Not all that big a difference, though, I’d say.

Yes, you are absoloutly correct.. I don't quite understand your last sentence though.. what is not all that big a difference?

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Mithras 

Yes, it's an interesting phenomenon actually. A friend of mine calculated the ratio of articles/users for each language -- some very minor languages scored very high, presumably because of a dedicated core of users and a sense of national/linguistic pride.

Indeed, that must play very strongly in expaining this phenomena. I would have expected the relatively minor languages that have a very dedicated user-base would have a high number of articles, but that they wouldn't beat out the most numerous languages so decisively.

I wouldn't have guessed that they'd equal some of the largest languages in number of articles.



V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by EricTheRed 

English is the trade language of the world and thus the most assessable language. At one point kione Greek was the trade language of the world. Times change.

Yes, well that's why I wasn't at all surprised to find English on the top regarding number of articles. That's why I meantioned it.

It would be very surprising if English wasn't the no.1 language on Wikipedia. Wouldn't you be surprised if French articles outnumbered English articles?

That's what this thread is all about.

V

[turtle777]

Someone's just bitter that he got beat by the Polish, the Dutch, the Italian and the Portugese.

It must suck to be a Bast... uhm, I mean Spaniard these days

-t

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by loki74 

Can we be certain that many of these countries don't already have equivalents that were localized from the get-go?

For example, I don't imagine there are very many MySpace users in Japan, but there are very many Mixi users there, and vice versa.

Also a very good point. Maybe there is a Japanese wikipedia already more popular there than Wiki is and it's just from the point of view here in the Anglosphere that it seems strange that Japanese articleas aren't more numerous.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Someone's just bitter that he got beat by the Polish, the Dutch, the Italian and the Portugese.

It must suck to be a Bast... uhm, I mean Spaniard these days

-t

No, but I am curious. Wouldn't you be surprised if French had more articles than English and Dutch more than German?

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Being one quarter Polish, I'm not too thrilled with a lot of the rest of his post either.

What? You are finding insult where there is none. Just telling you so you won't waste more energy getting your knickers in a twist over nothing.

There is no logic in Polish articles being more common than Russian articles, at least at first glance. The Russians are about 4x more numerous and from what I thought.

That's my point, that the number of articles should in a general way correspond with the number of speakers of a given language.

I assume there are about 4x more books published in Russia than in Poland. Just assuming here.

Is that an insult to your 1/4?

V

[paul w]

I think to compare Poland and Russia by population alone is a mistake - I would wager that the difference could be largely made up by internet access and the relative difference in percentage of middle class households.

And to single out wikipedia is kind of arbitrary. There may be other factors why people don't use it - having nothing at all to do with internet presence.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by paul w 

I think to compare Poland and Russia by population alone is a mistake - I would wager that the difference could be largely made up by internet access and the relative difference in percentage of middle class households.

Perhaps, that's the point of this thread. Is there any place one can see the relative number of webpages in the different languages. Are there in general more pages in Polish than Japanese on the internet?

Originally Posted by paul w 

And to single out wikipedia is kind of arbitrary. There may be other factors why people don't use it - having nothing at all to do with internet presence.

Singling out Wikipedia is of course arbitrary. I just singled it out. How much more arbitrary can one get?

However it is freely editable, available to everyone and should in a general sense reflect the presence of different languages on the internet.

I just found it curious.

V

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

No, but I am curious. Wouldn't you be surprised if French had more articles than English and Dutch more than German?

Only if I had prejudices and preconceived ideas about how things should be...

-t

[pinenuts]

every article in wikipe

[OreoCookie]

Interest in wikipedia varies, in Germany it's very, very popular. I use it as a (mathematical) encyclopedia all the time and it works well. It doesn't replace book on the subject, but if all you need is a definition or the explicit form of a term, then it serves the purpose.

I'm not quite sure what conclusions voodoo is trying to draw from the popularity of a website? I could also do without the jabs at other countries.

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

So Poland has twice as many topics as Spain that are relevant to it?

No, this was an answer to the question why people bother with their native language and use English instead.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

That's my point, that the number of articles should in a general way correspond with the number of speakers of a given language.

Why would you expect that? Is there some universal human need to edit Wikipedia?

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

What? You are finding insult where there is none. Just telling you so you won't waste more energy getting your knickers in a twist over nothing.

There is no logic in Polish articles being more common than Russian articles, at least at first glance. The Russians are about 4x more numerous and from what I thought.

Maybe the Polish just like Wikipedia more than the Russians do?

[SpaceMonkey]

It's really all my fault. I'm sorry I deleted all of those Japanese wikipedia articles.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Only if I had prejudices and preconceived ideas about how things should be...

-t

You do.

Who are you kidding? You're biased, jaded and rather boring German person. Fits my prejudice!

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

I'm not quite sure what conclusions voodoo is trying to draw from the popularity of a website? I could also do without the jabs at other countries.

Well you would be sure if you read my - you know - posts in this thread.

Wikipedia isn't just 'a website'. It is a multilingual user-editable encyclopedia, which gives it a truly international audience and userbase.

Not just a website. What are you trying to pull here?

Screw your political correctness. It was ONE country. ONE. Not plural in any sense. Thanks for furthering my German stereotype.

Sheesh.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by Chuckit 

Why would you expect that? Is there some universal human need to edit Wikipedia?

No oh smartypants. I assume equal (more or less) human need to do so. I can't see any reason against it.

V

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Maybe the Polish just like Wikipedia more than the Russians do?

Quite possibly, but I find it strange that they like it more than the Japanese for instance. That's a very internet savvy nation, uses their own language more than English and are quite well educated and more numerous than Poles in the world.

V

[paul w]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Screw your political correctness. It was ONE country. ONE. Not plural in any sense. Thanks for furthering my German stereotype.

Sheesh.

V

I think the problem is not political correctness, it's downright abrasiveness, which has nothing to do with the actual topic at hand. The question has been asked and re-asked, and maybe I missed the response but - are you this offensive in person as well?

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by paul w 

I think the problem is not political correctness, it's downright abrasiveness, which has nothing to do with the actual topic at hand.

I disagree.

Originally Posted by paul w 

The question has been asked and re-asked, and maybe I missed the response but - are you this offensive in person as well?

That personal attack doesn't deserve an answer. You should apologise.

V

[paul w]

By offensive i mean you are causing people on this board offense. Not me (I know better than to take forum comments personally) , but it's pretty obvious that you are provoking offense, intentionally or not.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Wikipedia isn't just 'a website'. It is a multilingual user-editable encyclopedia, which gives it a truly international audience and userbase.

Not just a website. What are you trying to pull here?

Eeeh, thanks for explaining to me what wikipedia is all about. It doesn't change that it's more popular in some countries than others -- which is reflected in the number of articles.

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Screw your political correctness. It was ONE country. ONE. Not plural in any sense. Thanks for furthering my German stereotype.

Nope, you were offending the Italians, belittling the Poles, attesting that the `Japanese have quite an education' and laughing at the Germans for not having had colonies (to speak of). So it seems that I can count (one, several). And has nothing to do with being overly politically correct. Nor with the lack of humor we Teutons have (it seems it's genetic).

So please stop with your stereotypical drivel.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by paul w 

By offensive i mean you are causing people on this board offense. Not me (I know better than to take forum comments personally) , but it's pretty obvious that you are provoking offense, intentionally or not.

Good, I meant to offense to you anyway, nor any other person on this forum. However, it seems impossible to mention comparations of nations without stepping on someone's toes.

Asking too many questions is politically incorrect. Obviously.

I made this thread because I was genuinely curious. I suppose curiosity on this topic is still too touchy. I don't know why. I don't care.

If I can't get an answer here, it won't ruin my day.

V

[abbaZaba]

why do you care so much??? what you don't get is some people don't care about editing wikipedia AT ALL. this is reflected in the disparity between large-population countries and countries with smaller populations. maybe there are more polish articles, but maybe more russians READ WIKIPEDIA without editing. who knows!

it is what it is, get over it, use your own brain to figure your inquiry out. stop fueling the fire in this thread.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

why do you care so much???

Gosh I care so much I posted a thread on MacNN!!11

I guess I care as much about this as the person who wondered if people would fly in a home-made helicopter. That's almost obsessive!!

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

what you don't get is some people don't care about editing wikipedia AT ALL. this is reflected in the disparity between large-population countries and countries with smaller populations.

You're quite wrong. Obviously people in some countries have little interest in editing Wikipedia. Almost none compared to some smaller countries. That is an interesting and quite odd behavior IMO.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

maybe there are more polish articles, but maybe more russians READ WIKIPEDIA without editing. who knows!

While that may be it means more than 6x many Russians read and don't edid Wikipedia than Poles. That's strange. 1.5x would make more sense IMO.

That's the conundrum.

Originally Posted by abbaZaba 

it is what it is, get over it, use your own brain to figure your inquiry out. stop fueling the fire in this thread.

That's also the interesting thing. Why is there a fire to be fueled in this thread? I sure didn't light it.

V

[CharlesS]

Safari users by platform*:

OS X: 20,000,000
Windows: 20,000

But Windows has many more users than OS X. Why would its numbers be lower? Oh noes!

*disclaimer: I made these numbers up. If someone derails this and turns it into a browser wars thread, I will be forced to start work on finding a way to hit you over the Internet.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

*disclaimer: I made these numbers up. If someone derails this and turns it into a browser wars thread, I will be forced to start work on finding a way to hit you over the Internet.

POST OF THE MONTH!!!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

Fits my prejudice!

Oh the irony

-t

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by voodoo 

No oh smartypants. I assume equal (more or less) human need to do so. I can't see any reason against it.

I can think of all sorts of reasons to expect it might not be the case. Aside from basic human needs (and even those sometimes), I would expect that different cultures often practice various pastimes in different proportions. For instance, I don't find it all that strange that French (American) football viewership isn't proportional to America's — they just don't play the sport very much. I figure that's the reason they're different cultures rather than the same culture.

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by CharlesS 

Safari users by platform*:

OS X: 20,000,000
Windows: 20,000

But Windows has many more users than OS X. Why would its numbers be lower? Oh noes!

Well oh noes! If we didn't already know the answer that question would be interesting. Like mine is interesting because there is no straight answer.

I was hoping for more creative stuff than "just because" and "different cultures".

What it says to me, personally, is that a very very low demographic in pretty much any given country edits Wikipedia. So low that a difference of dozen persons is clearly visible in the number of articles.

V