Pl.wikisource presenta motivi di notevole interesse per le similitudini e le differenze con it.wikisource.
Le similitudini sono costituite dalla diffusione della lingua (21° posto nel mondo l'italiano, 28° il polacco, entrambe sono lingue "medie"), dall'uso dell'estensione proofread, ma soprattutto dalla somiglianza di alcuni grafici delle statistiche di attività:
Discussione ottobre 2017[modifica]
Copioincollo qui la discussione in corso su pl.source.
If you consider activity of pl.source and it.source looking at proofreading statistics you'll find a similar pattern in Cumulative pages for each subdomain, nevertheless there are some interesting and stimulating differences:
- your activity is regularly growing in time,
- your activity is surprisingly regular,
- your quality level pattern is different, level 1 being lower and level 4 being higher.
I can't hide my interest and some healthy envy :-), I'd like to learn from you as more as possible.... I'd like to know more about your "work organization", but language is a terrible obstacle: can any of you tell us something about? --Alex brollo (dyskusja) 08:38, 27 paź 2017 (CEST)
- I'll add a +1 to Alex requests... In some of the international conferences I attended in the last 3 years, I've always said that Polish Wikisource was an example of a thriving community and healthy statistics, but I still don't know the secret of your community :-) Could you tell us something of what you do? We could also share it to the international community through the Wikisource mailing list. Aubrey (dyskusja) 19:36, 27 paź 2017 (CEST)
- @Alex brollo, Aubrey Today the Źródłosłów Polish Wikisource Conference started in Poznań and most of the community are there. You are warmly welcome to participate. If you cannot, we will answer you on Monday.
- @Alex brollo, Aubrey As the Źródłosłów has already finished I can answer your question, I think. I am sorry for the delay.
- Our high activity seems to be based on few highly active users who are fans of Wikisource and who spend their free time here because they like proofreading or find it relaxing activity. We found that high activity of few users makes often other users' activity growing and long disputes have the opposite effect. So most users avoid the latter. (The side effect of that may be that we are a bit "conservative" community, accepting new technologies and solutions very slowly.)
- How the new users came here? In some cases (eg. me & Wieralee) it was accidental. In other cases theese were some kind of (planned or not) promotional actions on external sites (Wieralee's puzzle, Rdrozd's messages in Świat Czytników or some posts on Facebook recently). The e-book related activity in our project seems to be the main stimulator of gaining new users. Al least recently.
- As you can see there are also hardcopy e-books available sometimes :)
- We try to utilize abilities of new users for the project. When I came to the project, nobody here was able to use bots to transfer scanned books from digital libraries (they offered mainly jpg's that time) and/or repair broken DjVu files. Wieralee's OCR experience, her ability for photographic reading and Zdzislaw's (who came here from Świat Czytników) programming experience allows us to utilize OCR software, gadgets and LUA to make work with texts here much easier.
- As you can see, we look for new users mainly outside Wikimedia projects.
- If you have more specific questions, you can also contact us on IRC (freenode/#wikisource-pl) almost every evening. Ankry (dyskusja) 13:32, 31 paź 2017 (CET)
- @Ankry, Aubrey, OrbiliusMagister Thanks for first details. If you don't mind, I'd like to ask you more into a permanent page, to make the talk accessible for any interested it.source user.
- Two questions about the workflow of specific books. Do you discuss uploads, or you incourage a free upload by any user (the former strategy being the de.source one, the latter being our one)? Do you work as a "formal or non formal work group" to proofread new uploads, or is most of proofreading work done by the user that uploaded them? --Alex brollo (dyskusja) 15:59, 31 paź 2017 (CET)
- We generally welcome any upload that is in scope and somebody intends to work on it. Advanced users often help beginers to make such uploads or to create index pages. Most of users prefer entering the book text to the state (red) that allow book page creation in main namespace. Few users prefer to verify text (to yellow/green state) and rarely enter it in initial form. We generally assume that we are all volunteers and everybody works on a book he/she wants, avoiding books that somebody else is currently working on. We rarely create "teams" to fully process a specific book, however, it happens sometimes. We are small community and in most cases we are able to guess others' preferences: sometimes when I enter a book I already know that somebody else may be interested in its proofreading or even waiting for more books of this author that may be made yellow/green. We are aware that some books will never be yellow or green and I, personally, think it is OK (it is better to have unfinished book than not to have that content at all). However, few users disagree with me here.
- We allow, however discourage creating index pages for books tha nobody intends to work on, especially in mass. I assume that you mean upload = index page creation: we do not care what is uploaded to Commons: it is another project and books uploaded there may be also used outside Wikisource. However, we noticed that some users do not look for new books and choose to proofread among books already available. So we sometimes upload books that we do not intend to work on, but guess that they might be ineresting for others. This is often disputed before upload and some users suggest that we should not do it.
- We sometimes start projects, eg. to process all works of a specific author. Some of them are almost finished, some are far from that. We used to convince users to finish unfinished and abandoned projects.
- Recently on Źródłosłów, we disputed about deletion of indexes that are unlikely to be ever finished, like this one.
- Concerning your question: beginers often can't upload a book, so they either worn on that what is uploaded already or ask somebody to upload a book for them. More advanced users upoad themselves books thay want to work on ar support others doing that. We avoid working on a single book by more than a single person at once. Unless somebody needs help/advice.
- We also disputed few times the German policy ensure that the book will be finished and we think that it is bad; it frozes the project. And I think statistics (Phe's) confirm that.
- Ankry (dyskusja) 23:32, 31 paź 2017 (CET)
- @Ankry Very, very interesting! Now it is clear that similarity of Phe's graphs between itsource and pl.source comes from a deep similarity in general policies; minor differencies coming, I guess, from a larger number of very active proofreaders and perhaps from focusing on proofreading instead of using lots of user time in developing tools & gadgets. Another very interesting similarity is the large size of your toolbox.
- I'd like to explore your gadgets, but I can't.... Polish is really too hard and Google translator doesn't help :-(.
- Thanks for your time, and... go ahead as you are going! Your way turns out as really effective. --Alex brollo (dyskusja) 17:23, 1 lis 2017 (CET)