Change Details

While looking into T147959, I noticed that both Bokmål (nb) and Nynorsk (no) are explicitly configured to use the Norwegian language analyzer. Elastic has a [[ https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/analysis-stemmer-tokenfilter.html | Nynorsk light stemmer ]], which might do better for Nynorsk than the standard Norwegian analysis, which is listed as being for Bokmål. This would be a test of the differences caused by changing no.wikipedia.org to the Nynorsk analyzer, probably including speaker review (unless it is obviously horrible). If it looks like an improvement, we would deploy and re-index.

While looking into T147959, I noticed that both Bokmål (nb) and Nynorsk (no) are explicitly configured to use the Norwegian language analyzer. Elastic has a [[ https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/analysis-stemmer-tokenfilter.html | Nynorsk light stemmer ]], which might do better for Nynorsk than the standard Norwegian analysis, which is listed as being for Bokmål. This would be a test of the differences caused by changing nn.wikipedia.org to the Nynorsk analyzer, probably including speaker review (unless it is obviously horrible). If it looks like an improvement, we would deploy and re-index.

While looking into T147959, I noticed that both Bokmål (nb) and Nynorsk (no) are explicitly configured to use the Norwegian language analyzer. Elastic has a [[ https://www.elastic.co/guide/en/elasticsearch/reference/current/analysis-stemmer-tokenfilter.html | Nynorsk light stemmer ]], which might do better for Nynorsk than the standard Norwegian analysis, which is listed as being for Bokmål. This would be a test of the differences caused by changing nonn.wikipedia.org to the Nynorsk analyzer, probably including speaker review (unless it is obviously horrible). If it looks like an improvement, we would deploy and re-index.