All look good to me. Good shout on not touching the weird stats since yeah, it looks like a database issue (can't imagine that's a one-off either).
best, Joe
On 3 June 2015 at 17:13, Michael Guss mguss@wikimedia.org wrote:
Thanks Tilman for taking care of these! I especially like the one on the London tube.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 7:24 AM, Tilman Bayer tbayer@wikimedia.org wrote:
From @wikimedia: https://twitter.com/bobbyshabangu/status/603137104885850112
From @wikipedia and @wikicommons: https://twitter.com/johnpmcdermott/status/605425957571338241
Also, for the record, on the suggestion of Ori I RTed https://twitter.com/soulislove/status/605086929042972672 (from @wikimedia and @mediawiki), to highlight the Foundation's web performance capacity buildup a bit.
BTW, I don't think we should retweet phony stats like this from @wikipedia : https://twitter.com/WikipediaTrends/status/605765827351056384 (that number of > 22 million percent is almost certainly wrong, perhaps due to recent update lags of the pageview stats files that two other people complained about on the Analytics mailing list recently) -- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
-- Michael Guss Research Analyst Wikimediafoundation.org mguss@wikimedia.org
Social-media mailing list Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media