I would just like to second Jessie's enthusiasm: this would be helpful to have available for certain media requests, particularly for journalists from smaller countries that want to write profiles about the degree of engagement their fellow citizens have with Wikipedia.Of course, we may find some disappointing stories in there as well, particularly underscoring the lack of editors from global south countries, so it will be important to deliver a good explanation for why anonymization means we have no useable data on certain nations. In any case, the results will be interesting.On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Kevin Leduc <email@example.com> wrote:
I know the researchers have already put some thought around how to break down editors by country. I think this falls under metric standardization and we want to have a consistent way of counting editors who edit across several projects. There is also an expectation that as you aggregate numbers, editors are deduplicated (not counted twice).I don't know if we are totally prepared to have this conversation yet. My priority list has discussions on how to break down editors by target site (desktop, mobile, API) first, then how to aggregate editors across projects.
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 10:55 AM, Yuvi Panda <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Yay to more people finding it useful :)
Editors / Active editors isn't too hard to had programatically. The
bigger problem is how to define 'editor from country' - one edit from
that country? Does that mean that one editor can be considered to be
from multiple countries? Do we double count mobile and desktop as
An easy way to do this would be:
1. An 'editor from a country' is someone who has made at least one
edit from that country
2. A 'desktop editor from a country' is someone who has made at least
one edit from that country on desktop
3. A 'mobile editor from a country' is someone who has made at least
one edit from that country on mobile
This muddles the data some what, since
total_editors_for_project, and also sum(mobile_editors,
desktop_editors) per country != total_editors per country. However,
this is super simple to implement and also still useful, so I might
end up doing that.
Of course, assuming this entire thing gets OK'd fully by analytics :)
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Jessie Wild <email@example.com> wrote:
> THIS IS SO USEFUL!
> For grantmaking, this is the exact type of dataset we want to have publicly
> available. A lot of the initiatives we fund are at a country-based level,
> and our partners have a really hard time understanding the effects of the
> work they are doing on the aggregate language-wiki level. In addition to
> this edits per country, it would be even more important for us to get the
> total number of editors / active editors by country as well. Kevin - it
> would be great to get an update from on the timeline for this (in Q4
> 2014-15, it was punted to Q1 2014-15, but I haven't heard anything about it
> yet ...)
> Thanks for starting this work, Yuvi!
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Yuvi Panda <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 5:41 PM, Kevin Leduc <email@example.com> wrote:
>> > Hey Yuvi,
>> > this sounds like very interesting data to look at. Here are my
>> > thoughts:
>> > - the Anonymization scheme sounds reasonable, and I'd like to hear from
>> > someone else @ wikimedia who has similar experience anonymizing data
>> > sets
>> Glad to hear that!
>> > - you were probably already thinking about it, but we need documentation
>> > too: a wikipage with the name of the table, data dictionary, etc... and
>> > even
>> > a blog post to announce the newly available data.
>> Oh yeah, definitely. Will come once the code, etc is done :)
>> Yuvi Panda T
>> Analytics mailing list
> Jessie Wild Sneller
> Grantmaking Learning & Evaluation
> Wikimedia Foundation
> Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in
> the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality!
> Donate to Wikimedia
Yuvi Panda T
Analytics mailing list
Analytics mailing list