>As Erik says, we don't have unique-reader numbers. We used to collect >data via ComScore but this was dropped as it was felt to be inaccurate >(though I'm not familiar with the details of exactly what was wrong >with it) The biggest inaccuracy of comscore data was that it did not measure mobile usage, we know from our own metrics that about half of our pageviews come from mobile devices and, in many instances, for some wikis, mobile access represents >80% of access, so comscore was grossly underestimating unique users.
Reader team sends a newsletter to wikitech-l@ with this kind of information that might be helpful. See newsletter from Mayl: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2016-May/085465.html On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Andrew Gray <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Nathan, > > As Erik says, we don't have unique-reader numbers. We used to collect > data via ComScore but this was dropped as it was felt to be inaccurate > (though I'm not familiar with the details of exactly what was wrong > with it) - see > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Stu/comScore_data_on_Wikimedia > & https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/ComScore/Announcement > > For example, as of Jan 2010, estimates for some languages were: > > * English, 190m/month > * Japanese, 35m/month > * Spanish, 32m/month > * French, 26m/month > * German, 25m/month > > You might be able to use this, coupled with contemporary editor > numbers, to get a rough approximation for activity rates *at that > time*. > > Incidentally, the old stats interface has a very rough "active editors > per million *speakers*", which isn't at all the same thing (not all > speakers use the internet, & not all internet users read WP) but may > be interesting - https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/Sitemap.htm?sortcol=9D > > Numbers more that 50/million (or 0.05% of speakers) are rare, and most > are statistical anomalies driven by very small languages. However, > there's a few with five to ten million speakers where we have fifty to > a hundred editors per million speakers (eg Czech, Catalan, Swedish, > Hebrew, Norwegian, Finnish). Note that these figures are for active > editors (5+ edits/month) rather than "any editors", so the true > participation rate will be higher. > > I used to use a figure of "one in five thousand" for English Wikipedia > in talks, but it looks like this was "active editors per speakers", > and so definitely an overestimate. At a wild ballpark guess, maybe one > in a thousand readers is an editor? Very curious to see what you come > up with - please do let us know! > > Andrew. > > On 19 May 2016 at 00:06, Nathan Marwell <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I am an economist working on a research project analyzing contribution > > behavior on Wikipedia, and am interested in computing the fraction of > > individuals who use the site and make contributions. I have found the > data > > on daily contributions, and am now looking for data on the number of > > individuals who use Wikipedia. I believe I have found the data I am > looking > > for here: > > > > https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesUsageVisits.htm > > > > Unfortunately, the data contained in that file only covers the period > from > > August 2002 through October 2004. Does a similar database exist for later > > time periods? Any information you can provide would be greatly > appreciated. > > Thank you for you time and I look forward to hearing from you. > > > > Sincerely, > > Nathan Marwell > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Analytics mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics > > > > > > -- > - Andrew Gray > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Analytics mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics >
_______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics
