That said, I found it to be a somewhat disconcerting notion that basic geographical information added en masse by a bot would be considered to be a negative thing simply because of a “data management” issue. From an ideal point of view, I see this to be analagous to making a dictionary but leaving out all of the words that start with X because they are used less and would take extra work to find.

To summarize, I think that the amount of entries on Wikipedia is its key greatness–for a resident of Smalltown in Tinyland to find a preexisting entry will allow that resident to add that, say, it recently opened a school, and the article becomes all the better. However, the same casual user might be ignorant to creating a new article, thus the information goes unadded.

Again, this point of view is idealistic, and I certainly bow to practical voices who say that otherwise.

First, your information about what this proposed bot would do is a little out-of-date. After many editors expressed their concerns, the bot owner announced he would work closely with the relevant WikiProjects. I don’t know how this will work with some countries without related WikiProjects (for instance, Somalia), but this is a good move.

Second, of some 530 woredas, or local districts, & the 300 (out of 930) towns in Ethiopia, I’ve been surprised (both in a positive & negative way) of what I have been able to find. For instance, one fellow editor, Yom, who knew of my personal effort directed me to a useful compendium of material at the website of the Nordic Africa Institute in Uppsala — which I reference in many of my articles. I would be surprised if similar resources don’t exist manhy of other countries.

Geoff