1. I was referring to the readership stats for individual articles for current events in general, as we see in the Signpost traffic report; not a meaningful change in overall traffic, although it would be interesting if that could be demonstrated.
2. I'm am inclusionist as far as Signpost articles are concerned. The scope of the Research newsletter appears to include research by academics and research by WMF staff; taking a broad view of what is meant by "research", Jeff's work would be of interest.
Pine
Hi Pine,
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Pine W <wiki.pine@gmail.com> wrote:
> Fun! Current major news events (good, bad or in between) seem to do good for
> our readership stats in general.
What is this conclusion based on? If you find evidence for impact of a
major news event on our general readership stats, please let me know
so that I can include that in the weekly readership metrics reports
that I'm currently sending to the Mobile-l mailing list.
> Happy to see this info here. Can you write
> up a brief for the upcoming Research Newsletter?
It's a great piece of data analysis, but not really in scope for the
research newsletter. Pine, in case you want to familiarize yourself
more with the newsletter or would like to contribute, see
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Newsletter .
>
> Pine
>
> On Oct 24, 2015 2:01 PM, "Jeff Elder" <jelder@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>>
>> Friday morning I saw a tweet from a TV meteorologist exclaiming at the
>> speed of edits to the Hurricane Patricia article page on Wikipedia. That
>> struck me, and we tweeted about the updates several times as #Patricia went
>> viral, including this tweet containing a public domain GIF of the storm on
>> satellite.
>>
>> The GIF tweet was #1 in media views, #3 in gaining new followers for our
>> account, and #5 in engagements over the past 12 months. (Fear not: I am very
>> conservative about tweeting GIFs. Thank you, Michael, for encouraging the
>> experiment.)
>>
>> Our Patricia tweets are roughly corollated to spikes on the article's page
>> views, but that's not due to a surge of clickthroughs. I'd like to think it
>> helped. (See attached.) The page went from nothing to 100K views in 24
>> hours, as James noted on Twitter. We hopped on the page's back for a ride,
>> not the other way around.
>>
>> But we got in that viral conversation, helped to demonstrate that news
>> unfolds on Wikipedia, and underscored our real-time relevance. (We're not
>> just waiting here for you to look weird stuff up.)
>>
>> The Twitter bot @wikipediatrends tweets page view spikes. I've subscribed
>> to notifications so we can continue to be opportunistic. Zack mentioned
>> perhaps becoming a stock tile or recommended account in Twitter Moments or
>> another social media starter kit for media. I'm working on it. I'm also
>> beginning to look into Snapchat possibilities.
>>
>> Welcome any suggestions of real-time conversations to jump into, or ways
>> to do it better.
>>
>> Thanks much,
>>
>> Jeff Elder
>> Digital communications manager
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> 704-650-4130
>> @jeffelder
>> @wikipedia
>> The Wikimedia blog
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Social-media mailing list
>> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Social-media mailing list
> Social-media@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/social-media
>
--
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