These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and see!
- d.
On 05/03/2008, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
http://stats.grok.se/ These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and see!
BTW, the raw data is here: http://dammit.lt/wikistats/
- d.
On 3/5/08, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and see!
Very, very interesting. This tool has the potentially to seriously shape discussions about notability and the benefit of retaining certain articles. Going through the list of articles I started, I see a big range from less than five per day up to several hundred. I think my most popular article is [[Female urination device]]. Recently deceased people do well. Anything pop culture does well. Roads, parks, long forgotten historical figures do badly.
Is it possible to get information about the source of the hits? In particular, I would like to exclude the noise of editors. When a Wikipedian looks at an article it's very different to when a random googler does so.
Steve
On 05/03/2008, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
Is it possible to get information about the source of the hits? In particular, I would like to exclude the noise of editors. When a Wikipedian looks at an article it's very different to when a random googler does so.
(This question may betray a complete failure to comprehend our caching structure, but...)
This information is taken from data served by the squids... don't logged-in users mostly bypass the squid servers in some way or another, or is that only when actively editing?
(This question may betray a complete failure to comprehend our caching structure, but...)
This information is taken from data served by the squids... don't logged-in users mostly bypass the squid servers in some way or another, or is that only when actively editing?
As I understand it, they don't technically bypass the squids, but the squids pass their requests straight through to the main servers rather than returning cached pages. The squids should be able to gather stats on logged in users.
On 05/03/2008, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
(This question may betray a complete failure to comprehend our caching structure, but...) This information is taken from data served by the squids... don't logged-in users mostly bypass the squid servers in some way or another, or is that only when actively editing?
As I understand it, they don't technically bypass the squids, but the squids pass their requests straight through to the main servers rather than returning cached pages. The squids should be able to gather stats on logged in users.
For technical details of the Squid logging, you should probably ask on wikitech-l, where Domas can answer for everyone else as well :-)
- d.
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 8:16 PM, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 3/5/08, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and
see!
Very, very interesting. This tool has the potentially to seriously shape discussions about notability and the benefit of retaining certain articles. Going through the list of articles I started, I see a big range from less than five per day up to several hundred. I think my most popular article is [[Female urination device]]. Recently deceased people do well. Anything pop culture does well. Roads, parks, long forgotten historical figures do badly.
Steve
Not to sound pedantic about it, but "anything" pop culture? Even outdated pop culture? The point I make is that "long-forgotten historical figures" tend to be something people might actually turn to an encyclopaedia for for at least the foreseeable future, but pop culture is well, pop. Just a reminder for everyone that a month's snapshot isn't that helpful.... compare the 10-12 hits a day for Edward Grey, a relatively undistinguished Foreign Secretary of the distant past with, say, the 17 hits a day for "The Great and Powerful Turtle", a character from an ongoing, if declining, SF series....
RR
Relata Refero wrote:
Not to sound pedantic about it, but "anything" pop culture? Even outdated pop culture?
It's been some time since I checked the policies but notability is supposed to be permanent. If something was notable in the 1800s, then it's worthy of an article even if it isn't notable now. Otherwise most of our coverage of historical figures would be labeled "historycruft" and deleted and/or redirected to various list articles.
Assuming, of course, there isn't some other double standard underlying the labeling of "cruft". :)
Saying that "notability is permanent" is a kind of wishful thinking, but it's hardly worth arguing. What I find more interesting is that one can neatly quantify the effect of various means of spotlighting articles. For the two articles I had that made "Did you know" in the period, the notice was worth 4-8 thousand views.
On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Bryan Derksen bryan.derksen@shaw.ca wrote:
Relata Refero wrote:
Not to sound pedantic about it, but "anything" pop culture? Even outdated pop culture?
It's been some time since I checked the policies but notability is supposed to be permanent. If something was notable in the 1800s, then it's worthy of an article even if it isn't notable now. Otherwise most of our coverage of historical figures would be labeled "historycruft" and deleted and/or redirected to various list articles.
Assuming, of course, there isn't some other double standard underlying the labeling of "cruft". :)
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 05/03/2008, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and see!
Interesting note: hits to redirects do seem to be counted.
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/USA
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/United_States_of_America
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/United_States (main article)
This data has never been available before. Extremely cool!
(And stop looking at my user page so much!!!)
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Andrew Gray shimgray@gmail.com wrote:
On 05/03/2008, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
These are from new logs gathered from the squids. Enter an article and
see!
Interesting note: hits to redirects do seem to be counted.
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/USA
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/United_States_of_America
http://stats.grok.se/en/200802/United_States (main article)
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l