It doesn’t actually include all the media, and – I think – edit history. It does give you a decent offline copy of the articles with at least the thumbnails of images though.
Edit: If you want all the media from Wikimedia Commons (which may also include files that are not in Wikipedia articles directly) the stats for that are:
Total file size for all 126,598,734 files: 745,450,666,761,889 bytes (677.98 TB).
To be clear, I’m fine with RAM being base 2 – it’s rather difficult for it not to be given the structure – but for fixed storage, this is an old-school measurement that only gets worse with each order of magnitude.
It doesn’t actually include all the media, and – I think – edit history. It does give you a decent offline copy of the articles with at least the thumbnails of images though.
Edit: If you want all the media from Wikimedia Commons (which may also include files that are not in Wikipedia articles directly) the stats for that are:
according to their media statistics page.
Nice stats. I always wondered. I get the feeling that ~678 TB is little bit more than ~111 GB.
Like, at least 7GB bigger.
We need a drive that’s at least… Three times this size!
Dear god, are we still using base 2 for file sizes? At least use TiB like a reasonable person.
It doesn’t matter in this case, as long as it is documented (and it is by the unit).
To be clear, I’m fine with RAM being base 2 – it’s rather difficult for it not to be given the structure – but for fixed storage, this is an old-school measurement that only gets worse with each order of magnitude.
deleted by creator
Yes, we all do
Nobody does that nerd