Great stuff Erik, thanks! It's fascinating to see the differences per project. The 9% for reversions on the English Wikipedia seemed really high to me, but then I saw that about half of those are IP's who revert their own edits.
I love the huge spike in bot edits on the Dutch Wikipedia - is that all WikiData stuff, or is that the species/genus bot? Jane
2013/7/23, Erik Zachte ezachte@wikimedia.org:
Navigation on wikistats portal is far from ideal.
Right now you can find them as follows
choose Special
choose Edits & Reverts
you'll see links to overview per project which again links to page per wiki with detailed tables and charts
Erik Zachte
From: analytics-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:analytics-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Ryan Kaldari Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 6:25 PM To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Cc: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Subject: Re: [Analytics] non-bot edits per month
Thanks! Those graphs are really useful. Is there any possibility that they could be added to the main stat pages for the projects, like http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/SummaryEN.htm, or even the report card pages?
It's unfortunate that such informative graphs are currently hidden away.
Ryan Kaldari
On Jul 23, 2013, at 7:41 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
Graphs showing non-bot edits have been available for the largest Wikipedias since earlier this month, see Erik Z.'s announcement at http://infodisiac.com/blog/2013/07/new-edit-and-revert-stats/ .
E.g. English Wikipedia: http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/EditsRevertsEN.htm
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
I was poking around on stats.wikimedia.org and reportcard.wmflabs.org to see
if I could find out how overall editing levels had changed (if any) over the
past year. Unfortunately, it seems that all of our "edits per month" graphs
show all edits, including bot edits. Since changes in bot editing levels are
often dramatic from month to month, this noise effectively cancels out the
usefulness of the graphs. For example, you can see a huge spike in March
when I presume the Wikidata bots were running at full force:
http://reportcard.wmflabs.org/#secondary-graphs-tab
http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/ChartsWikipediaEN.htm#3
My question is: Would it be possible to replace or augment these graphs with
graphs that exclude bot edits? I know that bot status is not stored in the
revision table, so this would be quite expensive to tally. Would it be
prohibitively expensive? Sorry if this is a dumb question.
Ryan Kaldari
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
-- Tilman Bayer Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications) Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics