About 'Number of editors who contribute 1 edit per month?' 

 

I'm hoping we're not going that use that number for our next fundraiser ;-)

The more inclusive our numbers are, the less meaningful, bordering on 
alternative facts. 

 

A person with one edit in any given month is as much an editor as a person who 
looks at the night sky a few times a year is an astronomer. 

We have billions of those on this planet!

 

Erik

 

 

From: Analytics [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Neil Patel Quinn
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 23:06
To: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an 
interest in Wikipedia and analytics.
Subject: Re: [Analytics] Fwd: follow-up on editors

 

Funny story: I noticed that Aaron's graph has the 1-month new editor retention 
on enwiki at about 7%, while I had recently done some queries 
<https://github.com/wikimedia-research/2017-New-Editor-Experiences/blob/master/analysis.ipynb>
  that put it a little under 4%.

It turns out I made an error in my Unix timestamp math, and I was looking at 
the 12 hour new editor retention rate. It'll be interesting to see if the 
ranking of wikis by retention changes significantly when I correct that.

 

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 2:15 PM, Aaron Halfaker <[email protected]> wrote:


https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Enwiki.monthly_user_retention.survival_proportion.svg

 

On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 4:14 PM, Aaron Halfaker <[email protected]> wrote:

Here's a graph of the retention rates of new editors in English Wikipedia.  

 

 


_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics




-- 

Neil Patel Quinn <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF> , 
product analyst
Wikimedia Foundation

_______________________________________________
Analytics mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics

Reply via email to