On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:05 AM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]> wrote:
> There is nothing stopping us, however, from analysing *relative* trends > using existing data. For example, we could generate graphs showing the > relative difference per month in edits by men and women and this data would > be unaffected by the unreliability of the absolute numbers (since we would > only be looking at changes in the percentages). > Using bad data here is worse than having no data. As Aaron and I recommended when we talked in person, we should not invest is using the gendered language preference data to track overall gender among editors. It's a case of garbage in, garbage out. Instead, we should be investing in more reliable ways to track gender among the editor population, if it's a metric that we care about. -- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
