Forums: Index > Watercooler > Familypedia reaches 20,000 articles, now 30.000, next month 100.000 ?

Familypedia reaches 20,000 articles[]

And in just under 52 weeks another 10,000. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 06:56, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Soon Familypedia has 100.000 articles ?[]

I have to upload 1 database: 20,432 surnames; 95,433 persons --Fred Bergman 20:43, 22 July 2009 (UTC

Mmmmm. They would quadruple our surname categories and initially treble our article count, then with info pages (which I'm sure count as articles) our article numbers would be quintupled. And my 13,000 would boost it a little more. But not very good if we find that they are riddled with duplicates of what we have. Your "adelenroyalty" sounds as if it might have a lot in common with hundreds of recently-created pages here. And we have not yet agreed on exactly how to name pages for people or for places. Upload GEDCOMs to preserve the data but don't rush to create pages from it, please. Festina lente. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:09, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

My usual way of working else was to look for persons in my database without ancestors there and then produce an ancestor gedcomfile and upload that, mostly gives this no duplicates ! Beginning must be very small files to learn the procedure ! Safe is also to upload to a collection point, from where is to decide to make individual articles or not. Fred Bergman 10:30, 6 April 2009 (UTC)

Good ideas - "collection point"s would include gedcoms here (where User:Phlox said we already have hundreds of thousands of individuals, I think). Another idea would be WorldConnect - easy to upload to; excellent display and linking; and you could say on each page that anyone is welcome to copy the material to Familypedia after checking for duplication. I could say that on mine too. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Which pages count as articles?[]

I said above that info pages count as articles. I'm not certain about that, but they are in the main namespace. We could run a rough check on that. Current number in the sidebar is 30,145. Last "New page" (Special:NewPages) was Chautauqua County, New York, United States, North America/info - fairly distinctive name at this stage! So someons can do a count in a few days. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:09, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

They do. I've just counted about 140, including lots of info pages, which ties up fairly closely with the current 30289. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 05:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

They do and they don't ! Making first info pages, they count, but after that making personpages, these don't count, so 1 infopage with 1 personpage, total 1 article ! Fred Bergman 10:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
That does not match my 140 above - about half of them were info pages and the other half were matching articles. I guess we need another count or two to be sure. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Latest "new page" is (-)Kelly James McGrath (1955-aft2009), which will shortly have a small renaming operation because a newcomer read the small print but did not take enough care with the big print. Current count is 31,208. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 11:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Following on from that gets us to 31373 a few hours ago when I wrote things down, i.e.165 "new pages" (in the main namespace) - latest was John...Farrell (1861-...)/info, and I counted 72 articles, 83 info pages, and 3 other subpages, a total of 158, which is not far off 165 and virtually proves to me that info pages count as separate pages. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 13:33, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
I don't understand that. I just opened first a number of new personpages, but I did not see a rise of the number articles, but when I opened afterwards the info page, without any information, without any link, I saw at the first saving immediate rise the number of articles with each time 1. After that I opened first a number of info pages and experienced that also this time without links at the first saving the number of articles immediate increased with 1 each. Afterwards the opening van the new person pages did not count immediately. I opened also a number of control lists (10 pages with links to each other and to my user article UNDER CONSTRUCTION, but also here I didn't see counting. Fred Bergman 13:49, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
It can always more strange: I just opened 2 pages, without infopage, and the only content I put on it was an earlier uploaded image, and yes, it counted for 2 pages ! Friederike Sophie Wilhelmine van Pruisen (1751-1820) and Maximilian Joseph van Chelius (1794-1876)‎ --Fred Bergman 17:29, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
and guess what ? the madness of counting has no end: I made an info page for 1 of these and yes, without any other information then the surname counts immediately for 1 ! Friederike Sophie Wilhelmine van Pruisen (1751-1820)/info --Fred Bergman 17:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
Solution: if you place an image at the personpage, then this page counts as an article; adjust an info page and it counts again; take off the image from the personpage and it reduces the number of articles with 1; put the image at the infopage and nothing changes. So you want to count twice then you have to place the image at the personpage, not at the infopage, or you must make a gallery!

Special:Statistics seems to give the rules. I suspect that /info pages count (as long as they contain a link). So a cheap way to increase the count is to work through the Deadend Pages and give each at least one internal link. Thurstan 23:45, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

NO, THIS DOESN'T WORK fot personpages with info pages ! Do you make first the infopages, then these count at the first saving, undepently whatever information is given, even without any information, only the name of the page. Do you make the personpage for this person, then this doesn't count. Don't you make an infopage then counts the personpage sometimes, but also sometimes not, I don't know why.
To start with, the page must have an internal link to count. Thurstan 21:42, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Yes! The Wikia statistics has a different count, I think. And one of them includes redirects, whereas another does not: that's about 5,000 difference. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 05:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Category (surname) pages don't count!? Fred Bergman 11:04, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

"Category:" pages definitely don't count. Anyway we are now at 31,001 and I set a new easy target: another 2,000 in 43 days, under 50 per day. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 09:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
Now 31,203, i.e. 200 in just over 2 days without bulk GEDCOM. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

No rush[]

No rush, Fred. Let's get all of the naming standards and processes working together properly first. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:55, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry! I have the possibility to make gedcoms as small as I want. So I start with a gedcom for 1 person, then 1 family and slowly expand to bigger gedcoms Fred Bergman 06:39, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

As long as there is no good programm to upload gedcoms, so long I am waiting --Fred Bergman 16:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

That's two of us needing to see what Rtol's program does about checking for duplicates before we move ahead. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 13:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
It is more important to have good tools and standards than to have a large number of unworkable articles ! Fred Bergman 13:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


31,400, thank you, Fred. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 12:48, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Don't tell me that you were waiting until your middle of the night for this ! Fred Bergman 12:56, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
No, I just noticed another 100 up so I recorded it. I'm a night-owl. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 13:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


Fred can go and update the Big Wikis page. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 13:06, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

I already did it, just after making number 31,501 ! Fred Bergman 13:11, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

31,833 - i.e. 31.833 in Continental languages[]

Progress. Still between 70 and 100 per day. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Yesterday we had more than 32.000 articles. Now 31.850. How is that possible ? Fred Bergman 05:14, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Well! I saw it at about 32060 before going to bed, so we've lost about 200. Deletion log showed just a single page. Fred had changed many articles; maybe that reduced internal links or something. I wouldn't worry about it. Onwards and (probably mostly) upwards! (Anyone wanting something useful to do while waiting for GEDCOM perfection could create lots of hndis pages for real duplications. They each have at least two internal links.) — Robin Patterson (Talk) 10:25, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

32,200 about 12 hours ago[]

Slowing a bit since Fred started preparing for his holiday. But with growing confidence in the GEDCOM upload (and a possible thousand more from Peize Wiki when I get organised) we can expect upwards movement for some time. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 14:14, 4 May 2009 (UTC)


Some time on 14 May. I hope Fred's making the most of that holiday. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 11:07, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


Moments ago. Welcome back, Fred! — Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


Welcome back, Thurstan! — Robin Patterson (Talk) 09:47, 20 May 2009 (UTC)


Robin Patterson (Talk) 02:24, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:28, 8 June 2009 (UTC)


N 18:53 Hendrikje IPPINGA (1759-1822)/info‎ (diff; hist) . . (+2,687) . . Fred Bergman 17:00, 11 June 2009 (UTC)


34519. I've changed the Biggest Wikis page. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 06:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


Robin Patterson (Talk) 16:36, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

huge up 36,266 [sic][]

Either someone has opened Pandora's box (but leaving no record of that number of new pages) or someone has changed the definition of "article". I'm off to bed, flabbergasted. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 15:27, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

If I should understand this, it should not be that surprise, but first I saw 35,000. then 34,800 and now above 36,000 without any information in recent changes ! Fred Bergman 17:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

huge down 34,756 articles[]

surprise today ! Fred Bergman 06:33, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

up to 34,906[]

--— Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:40, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

down to 34,656[]

???--Fred Bergman 21:05, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

again down 34,540 - 34,330[]

the counter reduces !!!! --Fred Bergman 21:47, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

not any edit or recent change, still reducing the numbers, is there something very very wrong at the central wiki counting ? --Fred Bergman , 2 July 2009 (UTC)

PHLOXBOT cut 2 to 3 thousand pages?[]

How is this to explain ? --Fred Bergman 22:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I have no idea how they count articles. Phloxbot has deleted nothing. The pages are intact as you can see. -~ Phlox 00:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
A quick test suggests that a page must be explicitly categorized to count (pages whose category is hidden in a template don't seem to count, at least instantly). So I say lets start ignoring the count as useless. Test example: Boers (surname) didn't count until I add the [[Category:Surnames of the Netherlands]]. Thurstan 00:11, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
so somebody has to make a bot to give all pages supplementary categories for counting Fred Bergman 00:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

The WYSIWYG editor will damage any info page with [[Category:...]] on the page. - The very purpose of this bot run is to remove what you want it to put back in. -~ Phlox 00:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I see Robin crying[]

...... he loves big counts........ my experience with personpages and /ancestor- and /ahnentafel- and /descendants- and /biography-pages was, that these didn't count until I added my avatar, then these pages counted. I discovered that after I removed from hundreds of pages my avator because a person told me that my avator editing was narcism, because everybody could in history see which user the page edited. Bergsmit.jpgFred Bergman 00:45, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

The tears are from laughter!!! Some genealogy wikis boast about their size, but size isn't everything, as the Biggest Wikis page reminds us. On my Squidoo pages promoting this wiki, I say we're not yet the biggest but we're working towards being the smartest. One area in which our numbers should count is in comparison with other Wikia sites. When we get to be the biggest (a little over twice our current size) we should have more influence on Central Wikia so that our clever template structures get more consideration in Wikia-wide changes. — Robin Patterson (Talk) 03:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC).

34,930 and the official definition[]

Settled down for the night, maybe, but our European and American contributors can step in at any time. Here is the official definition from MediaWiki website: {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} is a Magic word that returns the number of all articles (not counting Main Page). By default, a new page in the main namespace (the one without a prefix like "User:" or "Talk:") will be counted as an article in the statistics and the {{NUMBEROFARTICLES}} variable (on this project it currently gives 288,181) if it contains at least one wiki link (e.g. the text "[[Main Page]]") or is categorized to at least one category.


Robin Patterson (Talk) 02:33, 17 July 2009 (UTC)


Robin Patterson (Talk) 06:04, 24 July 2009 (UTC)


William Allen Shade 02:17, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


(Someone updated the "Biggest wikis" page) — Robin Patterson (Talk) 12:22, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


- William Allen Shade 14:30, 13 August 2009 (UTC)


- William Allen Shade 03:07, September 4, 2009 (UTC)


About 5 minutes ago the front page said "We are currently working on 99,985 articles and 130996 other pages." but at the top it said "99,988" and in the side panel it says "99,999". Nearly there, whatever! -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 06:08, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Now the side panel says "100,009". I'll update the "Big wikis" page again. -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 06:10, August 29, 2011 (UTC)



As we move beyond 140,000 articles, we are the 5th-biggest English-language Wikia and the 8th-biggest Semantic wiki listed on The occasional record of genealogically-significant numbers may be useful. I'm going to do a little updating of Familypedia:Statistics. -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 04:45, October 13, 2013 (UTC)

December 2017[]

On WikiApiary (noted above), we have been the 3rd-biggest for some time, being currently on 101,442,704 "Property values" - i.e. semantic "facts". On Wikia's list of big English-language wikis we are still some way from the top, with the Colors and Lyrics sites in the millions while we have barely 234,500 articles. -- Robin Patterson (Talk) 01:21, December 16, 2017 (UTC)