Proposal talk:Increase the amount of traffic of the bottom 262 Wikipedias to 15%

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Strategic Planning

What people cannot find in Wikipedia

When people concentrate on what people have been looking for, it is likely that these articles will prove to be popular. Obviously these articles work best when they are part of a network of wiki linked articles...

At this moment we do not know what people are looking for and cannot find and we do not know how popular these articles are once they are written. GerardM 06:48, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What if the approaches work for the big languages as well ...

That would only mean that we do not achieve the goal as formulated... We would still grow our traffic a lot. GerardM 22:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Rename this to emphasize growth?

I think this proposal should be renamed to emphasize the actual point: "Increase the amount of traffic of the Wikipedias outside the top 10 to 15%".--ragesoss 14:24, 29 November 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Splitting the bigger Wikipedias by Region / Dialect / Culture

A number of the larger Wikipedias are large by virtue of the fact that they encompass largely artificial communities assembled only by dint of a common (or divided common) language. An obvious example of this is en.Wikipedia which is (to my jaded view) often rendered unreadable from an English perspective by dint of the sheer weight of American cultural ethnocentricity, abuses of the language, etc, etc. If this (or these - and I am thinking Spanish and French as other likely candidates) were split, traffic volumes would remain largely constant but the big 4 or 5 would no longer be the sole repositories of information and users would be encouraged to explore other language variants and avenues of approach to gather what is at the moment low hanging fruit. In this respect WP is a victim of its own success and sometimes the stuff is just too easily available by stopping off at en.Wikipedia when better, more substantive and relevant local information may be available elsewhere. Once enticed in, local communities may feel more encouraged to stop and do a little work of their own thus growing the local ones and repairing some of this marked imbalance. Sjc 08:44, 5 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There are a number of knock-on benefits from this also. Notability will be less of a thorny issue since if the WP is focussed by country rather than language, editors will more imemdiately be able to recognise whether an article is notable or not. Policy can be tuned more finely to the needs of the country rather than as is at present to the artifically homogenous blocks of socially, culturally, morally and philosophically diversified agglomerations. etc etc. Sjc 09:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]