Wikipedia talk:Milestones

All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page. Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project. No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work. Click here for more information or to sign your project up.

Archives

Archive 1 (before Jan 2004) Archive 2 (Jan 2004–Jan 2005)

I have started off our first attempt to find a baseline revision for Common Unix Printing System. The proposal is here and is locked in to stop vandals from editing the URL to the revision: Common Unix Printing System/Proposed baseline. See the talk page to see the objections and review for the proposed baseline revision. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:15, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This is not a Wikipedia announcement. The Yahoo! deal is an announcement that directly involves the encyclopedia and foundation. Microsoft Encarta accepting user submissions does not. Britannica has been fixing their encyclopedia with complaints or ammendments for more than a century - it is nothing novel in and of itself. --Alterego 00:55, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

That's your opinion. I found it useful and helpful to learn about this, in my opinion, it shows that other encyclopedias are adopting Wikipedia-like models, a sign of Wikipedias success. We each have opinions, how surprising! Is there a "Wikipedia in the News" page where users can update with Wikipedia in the news, so that I can read about other announcements of Wikipedia in the news? Is there a mandate on what exactly is supposed to be posted on this page and what is not? I await your reply. Stbalbach 01:24, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Found Wikipedia:Press_coverage I'll move it there. Stbalbach 01:31, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I agree with Alterego that user input and contribution leading to alterations of content of an existing encyclopedia is not novel ... but replacing specific editors with community editing of such a resource is. Courtland 02:58, 2005 May 17 (UTC)

It seems as though the stats table page ([1] and http://en.wikipedia.org/wikistats/EN/Sitemap.htm) has not been updated since May 16th. Is that correct? Why? Is the all-language number of articles above 2 Million yet? That would seem to be an important milestone. Nroose 18:18, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

As one July 1 item relates to Wikipedia's high rank according to Alexa analysis, I thought I'd look at and share a couple of comparisons ...

• wikipedia.org vs. britannica.com
• wikipedia.org vs. loc.gov (US Library of Congress)
• wikipedia.org vs. dmoz.org (Open Directory Project, which Google uses in their directory and in their page-rank system)
• wikipeida.org vs. ask.com

Interesting stuff. Courtland July 2, 2005 02:12 (UTC)

It seems to me that three of those links are not working. Here are my versions of them:

• wikipedia.org vs. loc.gov (US Library of Congress)
• wikipedia.org vs. dmoz.org (Open Directory Project, which Google uses in their directory and in their page-rank system)
• wikipeida.org vs. ask.com

Plus, From the last time I looked at the stats, it seems as though Wikipedia might have gone through 2 million pages overall... Nroose 3 July 2005 02:49 (UTC)

• Thanks, Nroose. Can't understand why they aren't working (to give the comparisons) now. Courtland July 3, 2005 03:30 (UTC)

I think another one worth including here is ...

• wikipedia vs bbc

Yes. And today, BBC is at 22, and Wikipedia is at 23. Perhaps Wikipedia will be ahead of BBC tomorrow! Nick 17:48, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Announcement page has missed an important milestone: some hours ago, the English Wikipedia has reached 2,000,000 pages and 20,000,000 edits since July 2002. See Special:Statistics. CG 06:56, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

I've written a javascript tool for editing wikipedia that I'd like to publicize, as I think it's quite useful. Would it be appropriate to announce it here? Lupin 16:49, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Go ahead. Phoenix2 04:25, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Consider if not Wikipedia:Goings-on is more appropriate. — Sverdrup 13:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is an ongoing discussion for the nature of announcements that should be included in the Announcement and Goings-on page at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Announcements and Goings-on. Please participate. CG 14:00, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

I did not find that section on that page. Nick 18:01, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

responding to anon who placed the header: Impossible to say - particularly if we remove pages that will be deleted from the total. Probably something boring and anodyne, jguk 18:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• At a guess, one of Louis Emerick, Jerusalem: The Emanation of The Giant Albion, Gerber Scientific or Robin Hood (computer game). It varies a few either way due to articles getting deleted or undeleted... but it was probably created around 1430-1500 UTC yesterday. Shimgray 20:14, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pageviews per million have also risen, to a weekly average of 12,500 per million, implying that 1.25% percent of all Web pageviews are now converging on Wikipedia's 83 servers. This (very roughly, all else being equal) implies that if all web servers on the Internet were as heavily loaded as Wikipedia's, the entire Web would only need 6640 servers, which would fit snugly in one corner of a single floor of a single datacentre. In reality, the Web has at least 70,392,567 servers (counting only those IP addresses running more than 5000 sites: source: Netcraft), suggesting that Wikipedia's servers are over 10,000 times busier than average.

Gibberish: Wikipedia's reach per million is 12,500, which means about 1.25% of all web users visit us at least once a week. Our page views per million seems to be around 900, or 0.1%. Still impressive though. sjorford (?!) 21:10, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Something is new with uploading files... now there's this menu telling me which licence it's under. I came to this page hoping for some information/guidance about this. Alas, it was not to be. Coffee 17:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

After some discussion (see here, the Announcement and Goings-on have had a change in page design, and in policy. Please check these two pages. CG 18:48, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the announcement on an improvement drive for Haute couture because of it being panned in the Guardian, I can't understand why people who criticise such articles don't do some editing themselves to try improve the quality? -TonyW 00:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. To them I say, "See that "Edit this page" link? Well, be bold!". That whole article is junk, anyway. The T. S. Eliot article is bad because your book's not in the bibliography? That's not criticism, that's selfishness.--Sean Black ^Talk 00:15, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see that some announcements about the English language Wikiquote, the English language Wictionnary, which are Wikimedia projects different from the English language Wikipedia have been made recently. I notice also that the Announcement page includes a section called "Number-of-article milestones". For these reasons, I think that a milestone announcement about the French Wikipedia is relevant on this page. --Teofilo talk 16:47, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The date headings on this page come out as invalid URLs in the RSS feed. The [[ ]] are not valid in the URL. Perhaps there is a way to make the anchor not have the [[ ]] in it even if the date is linked? Nick 18:17, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Lithuanian has reached its 10,000th Wikipedia article (see the List of Wikipedias). I think this happened today. Whoever has that list going on this page should update accordingly. 139.78.10.1 22:23, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see this page isn't as restrictive as I thought. Well, if I want it done, I'd better do it myself then. 139.78.10.1 22:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The announcements page currently has a notice saying:

"As a follow-on from December 14: Britannica is using Wikipedia material, without acknowledging the source. The latest Britannica Yearbook has used Kamisese Mara, condensed somewhat and published in their obituaries. Entire paragraphs are virtually unchanged."

This is a pretty strong claim; in the absence for any cited evidence for this claim, I'm going to remove it from the page. Cite please? -- The Anome 12:46, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just to remind editors - this page is for news concerning the English Wikipedia only. Milestones for other projects belong on meta. Dan100 (Talk) 10:43, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Then why are there announcements posted for the Lithuanian, Chinese, and French Wikipedias? Jasongetsdown 15:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So I removed everything concerning other Wikipedias, Wiktionnary, Wikiquote : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAnnouncements&diff=31852972&oldid=31835826 --Teofilo talk 15:31, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia en will reach 1.5 million articles in a month or so; would anyone be opposed to creating a 1.5 million category for language editions box at the bottom of the page? I.e. the box listing the sizes of each language edition of Wikipedia currently jumps from 1 to 2 million, surely there is space for 1.5? Just a thought... Mikker ^(...) 00:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

oppose. This is a slippery slope. You could then also make a milestone for 150000 articles or 600000 or 123456 .... --Donar Reiskoffer 19:14, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm... not following you. The adequacy of a charge that something is a slippery slope obviously depends on whether the asserted slipperiness is in fact there. I mean, really, who wants a 123456 article milestone? We already have 500,000 and a million and 2 million, I see no problem sticking with 'round' numbers like 1,000,000 and 1,500,000. Mikker ^(...) 19:21, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ok, which of the following is the most round: 300000, 750000, 400000, 1500000, 3000000, .... you can argue a long time and add a lot extra 'round' numbers. --Donar Reiskoffer 06:34, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By all means announce it here, but if you check the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Milestone statistics, there is no support for adding extra milestones to that table. Warofdreams talk 23:34, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 I love this k.b of mines  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:2D80:8801:832E:2DFA:DD21:AE34:7D86 (talk) 00:13, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply] 

Alexa rank is 10 today. Bensaccount 23:45, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note - I've added a brief announcement. Warofdreams talk 02:04, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we merge the monthly archives into yearly archives? It would be much more convenient to just have to look through 6 pages of announcements for a specific announcement instead of 72 pages. Besides, so many of these monthly archives have such little content. I'm willing to implement this if no one objects. :) Coffee 03:09, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I say go for it. Few months have more than four or five announcements, so the annual archives should be of reasonable length. Warofdreams talk 02:21, 23 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's done. TheCoffee 02:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone here mind if your shortcut WP:A were used instead for the new content policy, Wikipedia:Attribution, which is a merger of WP:V and WP:NOR? I understand that it's currently not used much for this page, but it would be used a great deal for the new policy, so we were hoping we could persuade you to let us have it. :-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:57, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like a sensible plan to me; this page has declined in importance over the years and is no longer very active. Warofdreams talk 17:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. :-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia seems to have passed 10 million total pages (not articles) recently - has anybody noticed this yet or found out the exact date when it happened yet? (Right now, the counter is at 10,033,608). -- Schneelocke 19:29, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should this page be tagged as historical, looks unused? MBisanz ^talk 22:39, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's used occasionally and it's the only page for such announcements, thus, I would not tag it. -- User:Docu

Is it only me or have the heading fonts been changed? When did this happen? Was it done by consensus? ciao Rotational (talk) 08:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not specify any fonts - it leaves this to your browser, which will have a default sans-serif font set and will use this for Wikipedia. If you're now seeing a different fony, you've probably changed OS, browser or which sans-serif font is the default. - Jarry1250 ^{(t, c)} 13:25, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is this page solely just for listing Wikiproject's GA/FA milestones? Because as it happens these 'announcements' aren't terribly important. -- œ^™ 14:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. But some announcements is better than no announcements, which is why the WikiProject listings are there. - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 14:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I have yet to see "Any news concerning the Wikimedia Foundation that affects the English Wikipedia." (as stated at the top of the page) or any other news other than wikiproject milestones.

But you have a point that some are better than none. -- œ^™ 16:17, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quite. Other fora are obviously preferred by writers, but they must all turn down WikiProject listings! - Jarry1250 ^{[Humorous? Discuss.]} 18:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is the announcement of creation of wikiprojects alright? I've got three that might be listed... Multisport events ; East Asia ; North America .

76.66.203.138 (talk) 13:29, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

17 November 2010

The English Wikipedia now has 10 or more good articles.

15 November 2010

The English Wikipedia now has 10000 or more good articles.

- dcljr (talk) 01:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not aware of this being noted anywhere other than the meta page[2], but we recently (on December 12th or so) passed 3.5 million articles on the English Wikipedia (see WP:Size of Wikipedia). Does anyone know what the 3.5 millionth article was? Probably not, but I'm surprised it wasn't at least announced here. Robofish (talk) 16:56, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably see a little hoopla pretty soon at the five million mark. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Any explanations for that? hewhoamareismyself 22:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why report every day that there's no milestone? Jim.henderson (talk) 15:21, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(idea_lab)/Archive_18#English_Wikipedia_about_to_reach_5.2C000.2C000_.285_million.29_articles._Take_advantage_of_upcoming_news_coverage ★NealMcB★ (talk) 16:22, 15 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jarry1250: The entries by LivingBot are causing lots of malformed entries [3] [4] [5] [6] [7], as already mentioned above. Could you please fix them? Generally I think the entries since August 2012 are expanding the page way beyond usability. Could you change the format to a much more compact form, so the page gets readable and navigatable again and stays so? --.js (((☎))) 06:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You make a few different points. Firstly, the extraneous header issue -- I completely agree is annoying but has in the past proven a bit difficult for me to track down. If it reoccurs again let me know and I'll definitely take the opportunity to fix it permanently (I do also watch the page myself). The problem this month is different -- the bot couldn't cope with the change to the heading wikitext (should've added a comment to that effect, sorry -- now done). Finally, on format, I'm open to suggestions but I think the easiest thing to do to deal with the bulk is to archive a couple of years' worth, as I have just done. - Jarry1250 ^{[Vacation needed]} 00:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moved prev. comment to Wikipedia_talk:Six_million_articles#Six_million. Ema--or (talk) 23:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I got more to say here. Ema--or (talk) 23:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Who counts the whole number of articles? Over all the wikis………….. Ema--or (talk) 22:18, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]