I'd rather see you explain this, Oliver, as our incumbent page views expert. Your concoction of legacy PV seems to suggest 'Old definition, UDF' was about 1.1B per day.
Yet http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyAllProjects.htm shows 20B per month, 0.75B per day Erik -----Original Message----- From: analytics-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:analytics-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Keyes Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2015 19:38 To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Subject: [Analytics] [Technical] final pageviews QA Hey all, After the patches to the definition following the previous hand-coding run (see older threads) I've run a second set of tests. These can be seen at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pageviews_QA_2.png and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pageviews_QA_jittered_2.png There's nothing particularly shocking in the new definition; it follows the seasonal pattern that we're used to. I think we can call the new definition done, with these tweaks! It's also not as unstable as the legacy definition (good luck to whoever now has the responsibility of explaining why pageviews abruptly halved in the middle of February). Have fun, -- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
