Proposal:Increase the amount of traffic of the bottom 262 Wikipedias to 15%
The status of this proposal is:
Request for Discussion / Sign-Ups
Every proposal should be tied to one of the strategic priorities below.
Edit this page to help identify the priorities related to this proposal!
- Achieve continued growth in readership
- Focus on quality content
- Increase Participation
- Stabilize and improve the infrastructure
- Encourage Innovation
At this time, 92% of the traffic Wikipedia gets is for one of the top 10 languages sized by traffic with the other 262 sharing 8% of the traffic. It is clear that as a consequence the sum of all knowledge that we want to be available to people does not get to them. Several of the most spoken languages like Chinese, Hindi, Arabic, Farsi ... are outside this group. The aim of reducing the percentage to for the top 10 to 85% is not intended to stunt the growth of the top 10, it is intended to grow our other languages more.
Identify those factors that stimulate growth of our smallest projects. Experiment with approaches that help identify what is missing in our Wikipedias. Stimulate growth by praising, identifying the work that help us grow our traffic, particularly the traffic for our smaller projects.
Wikipedia is usable when it gets above a certain size. People use Wikipedia as the first resource to look things up. Most of our Wikipedias are not good enough yet and have to grow in size and traffic.
- What tools can we provide to our communities that help them make their choices that will affect the popularity of their Wikipedia
- How do we grow our communities of editors of our smallest Wikipedias
- What can we do to provide information when a Wikipedia does not provide information for that language yet
When our aim is to lower the percentage of the top 10 Wikipedias, as a result the total amount of traffic is to grow a lot. This however is the kind of cost we should be happy to carry. In order to provide the tools we will have to build them. Many are not difficult to build but the problem is that it can be reasoned why some of the proposals have the potential to make a difference, there are no facts to back this up. A classical chicken and egg situation.
Do you have a thought about this proposal? A suggestion? Discuss this proposal by going to Proposal talk:Increase the amount of traffic of the bottom 262 Wikipedias to 15%.
Want to work on this proposal?
- .. Sign your name here!