On 11 March 2014 16:33, James Forrester <jforrester(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 11 March 2014 16:02, Risker
<risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Editors, it seems, chose Monobook 2:1 over Vector
as of this time last
year, when there were many other skins; that is, they make the conscious
choice. (I also think there's something really wonky about the "power
user"
numbers. There's no way there are less than
15,000 users active in the
last six months with over 1000 edits across all of the projects.)
There's
a lot of value in paying attention to Monobook.
This is based on a mis-understanding of
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Turning_off_outdated_skins/stats.
Specifically:
One limitation of the data is that we could only retrieve users who had
actively set a preference for their skin; users
who had not done this
displayed with a null value in the relevant table. Such users are not
included in the numbers for Vector in the next section, which leads to
an
*underrepresentation
of Vector*. Based on an approximate
calculation,[3]<
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Turning_off_outdated_skins/stats#cite_note-…
this
may *exclude up to 85 per cent of users*.
[My emphases.]
To put it another way, all the data shows is that of active users who'd
made over 1000 edits, 1/3 had actively changed their skin setting to Vector
and were still there at the time.
As the person who gathered the data, that's a far more accurate way of
representing them, yep.
--
Oliver Keyes
Product Analyst
Wikimedia Foundation