[WikiEN-l] Well darn, Pokemon is important after all.

[Steve Bennett]

On 8/29/06, Andrew Gray <shimgray at gmail.com> wrote:
> Jellyfish wasn't on the list at all last night; the statistics are
> sampling (I think) one in five thousand pageviews, so it's quite
> likely a glitch. They've only been running for a couple of days, and
> I'd strongly advise against treating them as reliable until at least a
> fortnight in.

The sampling period is, from my observation, constantly being
decreased. It was 5000, then 1000, then 500, now 333. Well, I'm
guessing just looking at what numbers have turned up at different
times. I don't know exactly how the "+-111%" is calculated, but I
would say that we're getting to the stage where the values are
somewhat meaningful. With the exception of Jeff Hardy, all the other
top 10 entries seem very plausible and topical.

However, I can't see why Irukandji jelly fish would be so high. It's
not linked from anything, it's not in the news, and it's not even
jellyfish season in Queensland. It could just be a statistical
anomaly, or perhaps someone is deliberately messing with the stats?

> That said... JonBenet Ramsay is interesting - it surged last night and
> with no link from the front page. Interesting to see how quickly our
> use (apparently) reacts to news stories. The sex-related ones - lists
> of porn stars etc - were consistently high and are now dropping; I
> wonder where they'll stabilise at.

Yes, that trend is interesting - why did they all show up so high then
disappear. Was it a time of day thing? More stats required!! :)

I really hope we will end up with "last 24 hours" and "last 7 days" stats.

Steve