CZ Talk:Statistics: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger m (CZ Talk:Statistics page moved to CZ Talk:Statistics: "page" redundant) |
imported>Nancy Sculerati |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
To produce these stats, on May 18 I dumped the histories of edits of all pages. This was transformed into an xml-like file in a format similar to "stub-meta-history" dump files released by Wikipedia. I'm willing to share the data with the interested CZ members, so if you want to make your own stats, just let me know on my talk page. --[[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 17:43, 18 May 2007 (CDT) | To produce these stats, on May 18 I dumped the histories of edits of all pages. This was transformed into an xml-like file in a format similar to "stub-meta-history" dump files released by Wikipedia. I'm willing to share the data with the interested CZ members, so if you want to make your own stats, just let me know on my talk page. --[[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 17:43, 18 May 2007 (CDT) | ||
== Further development == | |||
I've just put some fresh data (I plan to update graphs too). Please do copy edit. Perhaps reorganisation of headers/text would be needed as well. I'm willing to feed similar info in future and the present structure is not well suited for this. --[[User:Aleksander Stos|Aleksander Stos]] 02:23, 10 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
I love this, Alexander. Do you think you could graph articles by workgroup? Editors by workgroup? If it's not too time consuming, I'd like to see the progressions over time. [[User:Nancy Sculerati|Nancy Sculerati]] 02:23, 10 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
Revision as of 01:23, 10 June 2007
This is fantastic--I think I can speak for everyone when I say that this is very much appreciated, Alex. --Larry Sanger 09:59, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
Definitely Cool! Keep them coming. --Matt Innis (Talk) 10:32, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
- Thanks. Needless to say that everybody is invited to edit this page, add his own work or make requests for further improvements, comments about the page, suggestions of new ideas etc. --Aleksander Stos 14:36, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
- Terrific page, very informative. Maybe you could put in a slightly clearer explanation of #6, Is this the number of users that log in each day, averaged over a month? BTW it would be easier to edit if you could break the page up into sections. (Maybe I'll try and you can revert if you don't like it.) I think the main data that stands out as missing would be the number of visitors to the site, which could be presented in different ways. David Hoffman 16:09, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
- #6 is the number of users that actually made an edit given month (no average, just count). Now, I put a line of explanation, but I'm not sure about it -- do correct it please if you find a good formulation! BTW, something similar to the number of users that log in each day, averaged over a month is the "daily use" section, but it concerns the actual edits instead of logins (no login info is publicly available). Thanks for your remarks! --Aleksander Stos 16:47, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
- It is great seeing some of these stats. It gives me a good feel on how alive CZ is and how it is growing. Robert Winmill 16:12, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
- Terrific page, very informative. Maybe you could put in a slightly clearer explanation of #6, Is this the number of users that log in each day, averaged over a month? BTW it would be easier to edit if you could break the page up into sections. (Maybe I'll try and you can revert if you don't like it.) I think the main data that stands out as missing would be the number of visitors to the site, which could be presented in different ways. David Hoffman 16:09, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
Source file
To produce these stats, on May 18 I dumped the histories of edits of all pages. This was transformed into an xml-like file in a format similar to "stub-meta-history" dump files released by Wikipedia. I'm willing to share the data with the interested CZ members, so if you want to make your own stats, just let me know on my talk page. --Aleksander Stos 17:43, 18 May 2007 (CDT)
Further development
I've just put some fresh data (I plan to update graphs too). Please do copy edit. Perhaps reorganisation of headers/text would be needed as well. I'm willing to feed similar info in future and the present structure is not well suited for this. --Aleksander Stos 02:23, 10 June 2007 (CDT)
I love this, Alexander. Do you think you could graph articles by workgroup? Editors by workgroup? If it's not too time consuming, I'd like to see the progressions over time. Nancy Sculerati 02:23, 10 June 2007 (CDT)