_______________________________________________Thanks all for your input. I was pretty sure this data point should be disregarded, but I am still a bit puzzled - I thought pageviews by default reflect user views and do not include agent=spider. What is the difference between spider and bot?Also I was wondering about the fact that the Hebrew caffeine page received a factor of 10 more views compared to the Hungarian examples (450K vs around 30K), and that as Lodewijk pointed out there was none of the spillover which one sees in the Hungarian examples.🤔Keren
בתאריך יום ב׳, 23 בדצמ׳ 2019 ב-1:58 מאת Nuria Ruiz <nruiz@wikimedia.org>:Hello,This spike is probably caused by bot traffic. I would disregard it entirely. Please see, for example, a similar problem in all top pageviews in hungarian wikipedia for last month.Thanks,Nuria_______________________________________________On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 2:42 PM Brian Keegan <Brian.Keegan@colorado.edu> wrote:Webmasters sometimes design their 404 pages to link to Wikipedia articles, so if their website goes down all their users (human and bot) start getting referred to Wikipedia articles. I could easily image there being a “This page isn’t available, go grab a cup of coffee” kind of placeholder page being up.
_______________________________________________
From: Analytics <analytics-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of Jan Ainali <ainali.jan@gmail.com>
Reply-To: "A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics." <analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>
Date: Sunday, December 22, 2019 at 3:01 PM
To: "A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics." <analytics@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Analytics] Pageviews anomaly
Another observation is that it only spiked from desktop and not from mobile which suggests it was not because of a general interest (which would cause spikes on all platforms).
Den sön 22 dec. 2019 kl 22:01 skrev effe iets anders <effeietsanders@gmail.com>:
I agree this is odd - especially the fact that both the day before and the day after, the article had less than 100 visits. Usually there seems to be some spillover at the very least into the next day.
Lodewijk
On Sun, Dec 22, 2019 at 5:17 AM Keren WMIL <keren@wikimedia.org.il> wrote:
Dear all,
It's almost Christmas and the new year is coming around. At the end of each year we publish a list of the most viewed Hebrew Wikipedia articles in the past year.
We have a data point that appears to be anomalous: the article caffeine received more than 450K views on one day: 26th of September 2019. We can't see any reason for such a surge and it is completely disproportionate. Even on English Wikipedia caffeine hasn't received so many views on one day - not even on the 8th of February when Friedlieb Ferdinand Runge who identified caffeine was features on the daily Google Doodle.
It seems this data point is erroneous. Is there any way to verify that, or inquire where the error stems from?
Kind regards and seasons greetings,
Dr. Keren Shatzman
Senior Coordinator, Academia & Projects
Wikimedia Israel
_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics