<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 17:33, Nitika <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ntandon@wikimedia.org">ntandon@wikimedia.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div id="">Actually not. And that's the main reason why we had to pull down the Leaderboard (tool that shows bytes of data that has been added by a student on Wikipedia) as well. The Leaderboard accounted for all the edits that a student would make either on the talk page or on the article space. Also, if a students work has been reverted on the article, the leaderborad did not account that. Ideally the total amount of data that a student has added should exclude amount of data added on talk pages, should exclude data that is no more existing on wikipedia and has been reverted. All this data is not easily accessible.</div>
</blockquote><div> </div></div>For me the above data can be classified as "Number of bytes added" and the sole purpose of it can be to have projections to increase storage if the program is to expand, am sure wmf ops is otherwise too good at improving infra and this would serve no purpose. I would call these as "fake numbers" because a rollbacker's number would be huge negative number, but I would assume everyone here agrees rollbacker does positive edits. There is no point in having this numeric data since one cannot infer anything irrespective of the number.<br>
<br>-- <br>Regards<br>Srikanth.L<br>