Does this mean there is a significant break in continuity for the older (pre 05/2015) stats efforts such as pagecounts-raw [1] and pagecounts-all-sites?
[1] https://dumps.wikimedia.org/other/pagecounts-raw/ [2] https://dumps.wikimedia.org/other/pagecounts-all-sites/ On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 7:04 PM, Nuria Ruiz <[email protected]> wrote: > >Any ideas about why there is such a big difference between the old and > new numbers? > I guess you missed the banner which explains the main differences among > definitions. I have copy pasted it below. > > Please take a look at the new definition here: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Page_view > The new definition has significant updates from the legacy one. > > <banner> > > In the old situation spider/crawler traffic (from search engines) wasn't > filtered (a known issue, we needed hadoop to make this possible). > Those requests made up almost 20% of total page 'views' on Wikipedia, and > even much more on sister projects (details will follow) > Obviously the top table row, with year-over-year changes, doesn't make > sense until the new pageview definition will have been in effect for at > least a year. That feature is now temporarily disabled. > > Also, the new data stream does exclude housekeeping traffic (mainly used > for fundraising banners). > As usage grew these so called HideBanner requests became far more numerous > even than actual traffic on smaller Wikimedia projects (not on Wikipedia). > We will update the reports soon, to make the impact of this 'pollution' > visible, which affected much of 2014 and first four months of 2015. > > </banner> > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 3:35 PM, Pine W <[email protected]> wrote: > >> IIRC from the previous numbers showing about 8.5B pageviews for ENWP >> recently (I think that stat was for Sept), it looks like the new number >> shows a major drop to 7.5B. Any ideas about why there is such a big >> difference between the old and new numbers? >> >> Thanks, >> Pine >> On Nov 10, 2015 2:02 PM, "Dan Andreescu" <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> \o/ >>> >>> On Tuesday, November 10, 2015, Nuria Ruiz <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello! >>>> >>>> The analytics team wishes to announce that we have finally transitioned >>>> several of the pageview reports in stats.wikimedia.org to the new >>>> pageview definition [1]. This means that we should no longer have two >>>> conflicting sources of pageview numbers. >>>> >>>> While we are not not fully done transitioning pageview reports we feel >>>> this is an important enough milestone that warrants some communication. BIG >>>> Thanks to Erik Z. for his work on this project. >>>> >>>> Please take a look at a report using the new definition (a banner is >>>> present when report has been updated) >>>> http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesPageViewsMonthlyCombined.htm >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Nuria >>>> >>>> >>>> [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Page_view >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Analytics mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Analytics mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics > >
_______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
