Hi all,
For all Hive users using stat1002/1004, you might have seen a deprecation
warning when you launch the hive client - that claims it's being replaced
with Beeline. The Beeline shell has always been available to use, but it
required supplying a database connection string every time, which was
pretty annoying. We now have a wrapper
<https://github.com/wikimedia/operations-puppet/blob/production/modules/role…>
script
setup to make this easier. The old Hive CLI will continue to exist, but we
encourage moving over to Beeline. You can use it by logging into the
stat1002/1004 boxes as usual, and launching `beeline`.
There is some documentation on this here:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Analytics/Cluster/Beeline.
If you run into any issues using this interface, please ping us on the
Analytics list or #wikimedia-analytics or file a bug on Phabricator
<http://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/analytics>.
(If you are wondering stat1004 whaaat - there should be an announcement
coming up about it soon!)
Best,
--Madhu :)
FYI:
*We want to build a new type of Collaborative Economy organizations, which
are decentralized, democratic and economically sustainable. Would you like
to join us? P2P Models <http://p2pmodels.eu>, a 5-year 1.5M€ research
project, is hiring: - a Project/Communication Manager - a Senior Blockchain
DeveloperThey will join an interdisciplinary team in Madrid, doing research
& building tools with social impacthttps://p2pmodels.eu/jobs/
<https://p2pmodels.eu/jobs/> Tweet
thread:https://twitter.com/samerP2P/status/1017822934222692352
<https://twitter.com/samerP2P/status/1017822934222692352> Working at P2P
Models is an opportunity to collaborate with people passionate to create
social impact, in an environment which mixes academics, hackers, designers
and activists. We do research on commons-oriented communities, and build
blockchain-driven frameworks and tools to support their sustainability.
More info: - Funded by the largest EU individual research grant, the ERC,
and the first to build blockchain infrastructure - With Principal
Investigator and advisors from Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University,
such as Yochai Benkler or Primavera De Filippi- Dynamic, young,
interdisciplinary team with a horizontal and inclusive culture- Combines
social research + software tool building, focusing on social impact-
Attractive work conditions and perks, with multiple benefitsFeel free to
write any question/doubt to p2pmodels(a)ucm.es <p2pmodels(a)ucm.es> including
in the subject “Open position”. The deadline for accepting submissions is
September 7.*
Samer Hassan | @samerP2P <http://twitter.com/samerP2P> |
http://samer.hassan.name
Faculty Associate, Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University
Associate Professor, Univ. Complutense de Madrid
Ignore my request. The penny dropped. I needed the iwlinks table
https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/28618
Kerry
From: Kerry Raymond [mailto:kerry.raymond@gmail.com]
Sent: Monday, 30 July 2018 12:53 PM
To: 'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'
<wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Quarry query
I'm trying to work out how to link an en.WP article to its commons category
using Quarry (the end purpose is create the datasets needed for Wiki Loves
Monuments in time for September).
I managed to get this far
https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/28618
which tells me which Wikipedia articles I need and whether they have a
commons category template but it doesn't get me to the actual commons
category itself. Now if I look at any of these articles in the browser in
the normal way, I can see a link to the Commons category on the left-hand
tool bar, but I can't figure out which table in Quarry has this connection.
Any pointers to the right table would be a great help. Surely I can't be the
first person to want to generate a table of data for WLM using Quarry.
Kerry
I'm trying to work out how to link an en.WP article to its commons category
using Quarry (the end purpose is create the datasets needed for Wiki Loves
Monuments in time for September).
I managed to get this far
https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/28618
which tells me which Wikipedia articles I need and whether they have a
commons category template but it doesn't get me to the actual commons
category itself. Now if I look at any of these articles in the browser in
the normal way, I can see a link to the Commons category on the left-hand
tool bar, but I can't figure out which table in Quarry has this connection.
Any pointers to the right table would be a great help. Surely I can't be the
first person to want to generate a table of data for WLM using Quarry.
Kerry
Of considerable interest:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326141291_Towards_an_inclusive_dig…
"Policy makers can use this transformational model to extend the reach
and effectiveness of Digital Inclusion through the last mile enhancing
existing training and service centers that offer the traditional model
of Digital Literacy Education.... This education model can be
replicated and scaled by the Digital India program by extending the
reach of existing rural Common Service Centers centers to reach remote
areas that lack infrastructure, thereby reaching the last mile for a
transformative impact across the nation."
I was particularly impressed with Figure 4: https://i.imgur.com/s30xY4C.png
Best regards,
Jim
Dear all,
I am working on a paper on why/whether people contribute (or not) to
collective intelligence differently projects in different countries. The
paper was inspired, partially, by several discussions I had with various
people on why different language Wikipedia's have different sizes,
besides (doh) the popularity of the language (and yes, English is
biggest because it is international; and yes, I am aware a few
Wikipedias are outliers because of bots creating machine translations or
auto-populating villages or such). But for example, Poland and South
Korea have roughly similar population/speakers and development status,
yet Polish Wikipedia is over 3x the size of the SK one and no bot can
account for that. So, there's more to that. I am already feeding dozens
of parameters to a spreadsheet for some modelling, but I a) wonder what
I might have missed - before a reviewer asks 'why didn't you check for
xyz' and b) would like to have a few nice sentences about how things
that people expect to matter do not (or vice versa). Hence, my question
to you all, in the form of this open question mini survey:
Why do you think different language Wikipedia's have different sizes,
outside of the popularity of a given language?
For reference, list of Wikipedias by size and language:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias
TIA!
--
Piotr Konieczny, PhD
http://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKoniecznyhttp://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus
> Why do you think different language Wikipedia's have different
> sizes, outside of the popularity of a given language?
Piotr, if you model organic editing production with a Poisson
distribution, which is reasonable for a first approximation, 3x+
disparities are just natural for the same population sizes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_distribution
I'm not sure the images in that article capture the wide platykurtosis
of large Poisson distributions.
Best regards,
Jim
Hi Piotr,
I would look into things such as distribution (is there one region of the
world Wikipedia is used more in general) and alternative projects (such as
Chinese Baidu) that might be more popular for people speaking the language.
And there might be some aspect to people living abroad editing their
language Wikipedia, but that's just speculating. Somewhat along the lines,
if people from language one move to places where language two is spoken,
and language two has a big Wikipedia already, it might be a motivating
factor to edit the other language more as well.
Best,
Lucie
On 24 July 2018 at 09:02, Piotr Konieczny <piokon(a)post.pl> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> I am working on a paper on why/whether people contribute (or not) to
> collective intelligence differently projects in different countries. The
> paper was inspired, partially, by several discussions I had with various
> people on why different language Wikipedia's have different sizes,
> besides (doh) the popularity of the language (and yes, English is
> biggest because it is international; and yes, I am aware a few
> Wikipedias are outliers because of bots creating machine translations or
> auto-populating villages or such). But for example, Poland and South
> Korea have roughly similar population/speakers and development status,
> yet Polish Wikipedia is over 3x the size of the SK one and no bot can
> account for that. So, there's more to that. I am already feeding dozens
> of parameters to a spreadsheet for some modelling, but I a) wonder what
> I might have missed - before a reviewer asks 'why didn't you check for
> xyz' and b) would like to have a few nice sentences about how things
> that people expect to matter do not (or vice versa). Hence, my question
> to you all, in the form of this open question mini survey:
>
> Why do you think different language Wikipedia's have different sizes,
> outside of the popularity of a given language?
>
> For reference, list of Wikipedias by size and language:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias
>
> TIA!
>
> --
> Piotr Konieczny, PhD
> http://hanyang.academia.edu/PiotrKonieczny
> http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=gdV8_AEAAAAJ
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>
--
Lucie-Aimée Kaffee
Web and Internet Science Group
School of Electronics and Computer Science
University of Southampton
