Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-12 Thread Adam Baso 
Inline.

On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:28 AM, MZMcBride  wrote:

> Steven Walling wrote:
> >It's really great to see Wikipedia highlighted as a source for news and
> >current events. It's rare that people fully recognize the degree to which
> >the "encyclopedia" is actually very good at trending news information.
> >That said, the report paints a rosy picture that, strategically speaking,
> >may not be cause for celebration.
>
> Does the Knight Foundation disclose somewhere in this report that it's a
> donor to the Wikimedia Foundation?
>

I didn't see it in there. Looks like this was commissioned work.


>
> Comparing Wikipedia to sites like BuzzFeed and CNN seems to be a pretty
> classic case of comparing apples to oranges.
>

It seems like it's contextualized in
https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to/mobile-america-how-different-audiences-tap-mobile-news-1c72525210d7
as follows:

"The information and reference site Wikipedia is linked to news behavior
and is a critical pathway to the news and information ecosystem."

"Information and reference sites are linked to news behavior and often
drive traffic to news content. Wikipedia figures prominently in mobile
content access."



> >Neglecting to show people the value of the apps will help grow mobile web
> >traffic in the short term, but in the long run may leave us entirely
> >dependent on search (i.e. Google) or simply not growing readers, despite
> >millions of people still coming online via mobile.
>
> Can you elaborate on the value of the apps? HTTP is a free and open
> standard with very wide support. iOS is closed and proprietary. Maybe you
> can explain how investing resources into the latter aligns with
> Wikimedia's values?


The web and the apps are both ways to provide access to the openly licensed
content. We should and do invest in both on the grounds of reaching users
through popular channels.

I think Steven was talking about something different in terms of strategic
risk of disintermediation, though. I don't see the future as dystopian.
Rather I see a more utopian future requiring continued improvement in
dialogue with communities and nurturing of partnerships.


>
> Personally, I say hasten the day that we abolish the horrible "m." from
> our URLs and MobileFrontend from our servers.
>

I don't think it's something we're planning to do soon, but I agree it
would be nice to consolidate domain names.

I don't think we're at the place where we can yet deliver on converging the
full tech stack (and this was the feedback we basically received at the dev
summit), although I think we should keep iterating on this discussion over
the coming quarters. There are good things in MediaWiki Core and
desktop-oriented extensions and there are good things in MobileFrontend,
and I'm interested to see how we can port some things over if not
consolidate some pieces.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread MZMcBride 
Steven Walling wrote:
>It's really great to see Wikipedia highlighted as a source for news and
>current events. It's rare that people fully recognize the degree to which
>the "encyclopedia" is actually very good at trending news information.
>That said, the report paints a rosy picture that, strategically speaking,
>may not be cause for celebration.

Does the Knight Foundation disclose somewhere in this report that it's a
donor to the Wikimedia Foundation?

Comparing Wikipedia to sites like BuzzFeed and CNN seems to be a pretty
classic case of comparing apples to oranges.

>Neglecting to show people the value of the apps will help grow mobile web
>traffic in the short term, but in the long run may leave us entirely
>dependent on search (i.e. Google) or simply not growing readers, despite
>millions of people still coming online via mobile.

Can you elaborate on the value of the apps? HTTP is a free and open
standard with very wide support. iOS is closed and proprietary. Maybe you
can explain how investing resources into the latter aligns with
Wikimedia's values?

Personally, I say hasten the day that we abolish the horrible "m." from
our URLs and MobileFrontend from our servers.

MZMcBride



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Steven Walling 
It's really great to see Wikipedia highlighted as a source for news and
current events. It's rare that people fully recognize the degree to which
the "encyclopedia" is actually very good at trending news information. That
said, the report paints a rosy picture that, strategically speaking, may
not be cause for celebration.

Remember that, when looking at pageviews, we're a little over 40% mobile.
Most other major Internet properties are now primarily mobile, and that's
where most media consumption is even in once desktop-centric markets like
the US.(1)

Has Dario or anyone done an update on the traffic analysis from 2014,(2)
where we concluded that declining desktop traffic in mature markets like
the US was not being offset by mobile web? What's the current state of the
world when it comes to Wikipedia mobile traffic, overall and broken down by
app vs. mobile web?

It seems obvious that part of the reason Wikipedia is so popular on mobile
web is because we're an odd duck -- Wikimedia is one of the only top media
orgs not doing any kind of app upsell at all on mobile web. The vast
majority of major Internet properties heavily push app installs and usage
to varying degrees of aggressiveness. This directly sacrifices mobile web
traffic for a longterm gain in reader retention.

The linked report shows that Wikipedia app users are much more engaged --
avg time spent per person in the Wikipedia app is more than double that of
mobile web, according to their data -- but the number of app users is
ridiculously tiny, relatively speaking.(3) In commercial apps, prioritizing
long term retention of app users is good for a business. They can then be
converted to subscribers, purchase in-app upgrades, or click on ads. In the
Wikimedia context, greater mobile retention and time spent could be used to
teach people to contribute, and to facilitate less aggressive forms of
mobile fundraising than we've previously had to do. Not to mention
providing readers with faster direct access to knowledge, and doing a
better job of teaching mobile-first US in emerging markets what Wikipedia
is.

Neglecting to show people the value of the apps will help grow mobile web
traffic in the short term, but in the long run may leave us entirely
dependent on search (i.e. Google) or simply not growing readers, despite
millions of people still coming online via mobile. In the report data you
can see that most of the US news sites mentioned are dependent on Facebook,
even if they have an app. Unlike them, Wikipedia has an opportunity to get
away from being dependent on another source for readers, and be one of the
primary apps that every person on the planet uses, alongside Facebook,
messaging tools, and similar. Right now, we're squandering that
opportunity, and it's going to get harder to change as time goes on.

1.
http://techcrunch.com/2014/08/21/majority-of-digital-media-consumption-now-takes-place-in-mobile-apps/
2.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014_Readership_Update,_WMF_Metrics_Meeting,_December.pdf
3.
https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to/news-goes-mobile-how-people-use-smartphones-to-access-information-53ccb850d80a#.ofpb8txup

On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 12:50 PM Michael Peel  wrote:

> Isn't it time to start moving to responsive mediawiki templates (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design), rather than having
> a separate mobile interface/URL?
>
> For a practical example, see the BBC News website (
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news), which is the same website on all devices, it
> just rescales the content/navigation/layout to suit the device. (Try
> resizing your web browser on your computer to the size of a mobile web
> browser to see what I mean.)
>
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> > On 11 May 2016, at 20:36, Gerard Meijssen 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hoi,
> > It is wonderful to see how we have evolved.. Does anyone remember the
> good
> > old days when it was an application totally and utterly outside of
> > MediaWiki?
> > Thanks,
> > GerardM
> >
> > On 11 May 2016 at 20:33, Pine W  wrote:
> >
> >> Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
> >> readership.
> >>
> >> Thanks Tilman!
> >>
> >> Pine
> >>
> >> -- Forwarded message --
> >> From: Tilman Bayer 
> >> Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
> >> Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in
> terms
> >> of popularity"
> >> To: mobile-l 
> >> Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics
> Team
> >> -
> >> Internal 
> >>
> >>
> >> New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
> >> https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
> >> summarized here:
> >>
> >>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/
> >>
> >> "People spent more time on Wikipedia’s

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread James Forrester 
On 11 May 2016 at 14:20, Michael Peel  wrote:

> I'm hoping that having a responsive skin for the webpages isn't too far
> off, though?
>

Reading can answer that better than I; however, making the skin itself ​is
only part of the issue – you also would want to scrap m.wikimedia.org
*etc. *​Right now, the mobile sites have to make massive changes to the
content to make it fit on​ a mobile screen (and even then can't fix some
things, like tables). Giving mobile users a responsive skin whilst the
contents weren't appropriate wouldn't make anyone happy. Until the contents
of at least most the millions of pages of Wikimedia wikis' projects are
mobile-safe, we can't reasonably get rid of the mobile "site".

J.
-- 
James D. Forrester
Lead Product Manager, Editing
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

jforres...@wikimedia.org | @jdforrester
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Michael Peel 

> On 11 May 2016, at 22:07, James Forrester  wrote:
> 
> On 11 May 2016 at 12:50, Michael Peel  wrote:
> 
>> Isn't it time to start moving to responsive mediawiki templates (
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design), rather than having
>> a separate mobile interface/URL?
> 
> 
>> For a practical example, see the BBC News website (
>> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news), which is the same website on all devices, it
>> just rescales the content/navigation/layout to suit the device. (Try
>> resizing your web browser on your computer to the size of a mobile web
>> browser to see what I mean.)
>> 
> 
> ​Hey Mike,
> 
> I think you're confusing two things – a single skin with responsive design
> for all users on all devices, which is a long-term ambition, but for the
> Reading department to talk about :-) – and responsive templates for
> content, which we're working on in terms of scoped styling for templates
> through TemplateStyles (
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TemplateStyles, though by "we" I
> mostly mean Coren as a volunteer developer). This second one is going
> through security review right now, but once that's complete we'll enable it
> for testing and gradual roll-out.
> 
> Scoped styling of templates will let template authors make their templates
> work on any sized device, which will massively improve the terrible
> experience from templates like infoboxes, navboxes, amboxes, and especially
> one-off templates like those used by the Signpost. However, it'll need a
> concerted effort from all of us to re-write and improve all the thousands
> of templates across our hundreds of wikis to make this a reality. It
> requires judgement, æsthetics and expertise, and so isn't something that
> can be done automatically by software. It's a big effort, but it's going to
> be worth it. :-)

When I said templates here I meant skins - sorry for using confusing/outdated 
terminology (back when I was last developing website skins, they were called 
templates!). It's great to hear that they're being worked on - mediawiki 
template styles are definitely something that need improving in the near future 
(hopefully along with table styles, since they are currently horribly displayed 
on mobiles). I'm hoping that having a responsive skin for the webpages isn't 
too far off, though?

Thanks,
Mike
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread James Forrester 
On 11 May 2016 at 12:50, Michael Peel  wrote:

> Isn't it time to start moving to responsive mediawiki templates (
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design), rather than having
> a separate mobile interface/URL?


> For a practical example, see the BBC News website (
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news), which is the same website on all devices, it
> just rescales the content/navigation/layout to suit the device. (Try
> resizing your web browser on your computer to the size of a mobile web
> browser to see what I mean.)
>

​Hey Mike,

I think you're confusing two things – a single skin with responsive design
for all users on all devices, which is a long-term ambition, but for the
Reading department to talk about :-) – and responsive templates for
content, which we're working on in terms of scoped styling for templates
through TemplateStyles (
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:TemplateStyles, though by "we" I
mostly mean Coren as a volunteer developer). This second one is going
through security review right now, but once that's complete we'll enable it
for testing and gradual roll-out.

Scoped styling of templates will let template authors make their templates
work on any sized device, which will massively improve the terrible
experience from templates like infoboxes, navboxes, amboxes, and especially
one-off templates like those used by the Signpost. However, it'll need a
concerted effort from all of us to re-write and improve all the thousands
of templates across our hundreds of wikis to make this a reality. It
requires judgement, æsthetics and expertise, and so isn't something that
can be done automatically by software. It's a big effort, but it's going to
be worth it. :-)

J.
-- 
James D. Forrester
Lead Product Manager, Editing
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

jforres...@wikimedia.org | @jdforrester
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Michael Peel 
Isn't it time to start moving to responsive mediawiki templates 
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_web_design), rather than having a 
separate mobile interface/URL?

For a practical example, see the BBC News website (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news), 
which is the same website on all devices, it just rescales the 
content/navigation/layout to suit the device. (Try resizing your web browser on 
your computer to the size of a mobile web browser to see what I mean.)

Thanks,
Mike

> On 11 May 2016, at 20:36, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:
> 
> Hoi,
> It is wonderful to see how we have evolved.. Does anyone remember the good
> old days when it was an application totally and utterly outside of
> MediaWiki?
> Thanks,
> GerardM
> 
> On 11 May 2016 at 20:33, Pine W  wrote:
> 
>> Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
>> readership.
>> 
>> Thanks Tilman!
>> 
>> Pine
>> 
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Tilman Bayer 
>> Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
>> Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms
>> of popularity"
>> To: mobile-l 
>> Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics Team
>> -
>> Internal 
>> 
>> 
>> New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
>> https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
>> summarized here:
>> 
>> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/
>> 
>> "People spent more time on Wikipedia’s mobile site than any other news
>> or information site in Knight’s analysis, about 13 minutes per month
>> for the average visitor. CNN wasn’t too far behind, at 9 minutes 45
>> seconds per month. BuzzFeed clocked in third at 9 minutes 21 seconds
>> per month. (BuzzFeed, however, slays both CNN and Wikipedia in time
>> spent with the sites’ apps, compared with mobile websites. BuzzFeed
>> users devote more than 2 hours per month to its apps, compared with
>> about 46 minutes among CNN app users and 31 minutes among Wikipedia
>> app loyalists.)
>> 
>> Another way to look at Wikipedia’s influence: Wikipedia reaches almost
>> one-third of the total mobile population each month, according to
>> Knight’s analysis, which used data from the audience-tracking firm
>> Nielsen."
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Tilman Bayer
>> Senior Analyst
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> IRC (Freenode): HaeB
>> 
>> ___
>> Mobile-l mailing list
>> mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
> 


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Gerard Meijssen 
Hoi,
It is wonderful to see how we have evolved.. Does anyone remember the good
old days when it was an application totally and utterly outside of
MediaWiki?
Thanks,
 GerardM

On 11 May 2016 at 20:33, Pine W  wrote:

> Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
> readership.
>
> Thanks Tilman!
>
> Pine
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Tilman Bayer 
> Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
> Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms
> of popularity"
> To: mobile-l 
> Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics Team
> -
> Internal 
>
>
> New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
> https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
> summarized here:
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/
>
> "People spent more time on Wikipedia’s mobile site than any other news
> or information site in Knight’s analysis, about 13 minutes per month
> for the average visitor. CNN wasn’t too far behind, at 9 minutes 45
> seconds per month. BuzzFeed clocked in third at 9 minutes 21 seconds
> per month. (BuzzFeed, however, slays both CNN and Wikipedia in time
> spent with the sites’ apps, compared with mobile websites. BuzzFeed
> users devote more than 2 hours per month to its apps, compared with
> about 46 minutes among CNN app users and 31 minutes among Wikipedia
> app loyalists.)
>
> Another way to look at Wikipedia’s influence: Wikipedia reaches almost
> one-third of the total mobile population each month, according to
> Knight’s analysis, which used data from the audience-tracking firm
> Nielsen."
>
>
> --
> Tilman Bayer
> Senior Analyst
> Wikimedia Foundation
> IRC (Freenode): HaeB
>
> ___
> Mobile-l mailing list
> mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Habib M'henni 
Thanks Pine, as said, very interesting!

Best regards,
Habib

Le 11/05/2016 19:42, Ivan Martínez a écrit :
> Thanks for sharing Pine, quite interesting.
> Best,
> 
> 2016-05-11 13:33 GMT-05:00 Pine W :
> 
>> Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
>> readership.
>>
>> Thanks Tilman!
>>
>> Pine
>>
>> -- Forwarded message --
>> From: Tilman Bayer 
>> Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
>> Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms
>> of popularity"
>> To: mobile-l 
>> Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics Team
>> -
>> Internal 
>>
>>
>> New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
>> https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
>> summarized here:
>>
>> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/
>>
>> "People spent more time on Wikipedia’s mobile site than any other news
>> or information site in Knight’s analysis, about 13 minutes per month
>> for the average visitor. CNN wasn’t too far behind, at 9 minutes 45
>> seconds per month. BuzzFeed clocked in third at 9 minutes 21 seconds
>> per month. (BuzzFeed, however, slays both CNN and Wikipedia in time
>> spent with the sites’ apps, compared with mobile websites. BuzzFeed
>> users devote more than 2 hours per month to its apps, compared with
>> about 46 minutes among CNN app users and 31 minutes among Wikipedia
>> app loyalists.)
>>
>> Another way to look at Wikipedia’s influence: Wikipedia reaches almost
>> one-third of the total mobile population each month, according to
>> Knight’s analysis, which used data from the audience-tracking firm
>> Nielsen."
>>
>>
>> --
>> Tilman Bayer
>> Senior Analyst
>> Wikimedia Foundation
>> IRC (Freenode): HaeB
>>
>> ___
>> Mobile-l mailing list
>> mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
.
Habib M'henni
Technologue, ingénieur civil à l'Iset de Nabeul
Membre fondateur de CLibre et Wikimedia TN User Group
http://about.me/habibmhenni
http://habibmhenni.tn
Téléphone : +216 52232190
[Thund.linux]

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Ivan Martínez 
Thanks for sharing Pine, quite interesting.
Best,

2016-05-11 13:33 GMT-05:00 Pine W :

> Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
> readership.
>
> Thanks Tilman!
>
> Pine
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Tilman Bayer 
> Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
> Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms
> of popularity"
> To: mobile-l 
> Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics Team
> -
> Internal 
>
>
> New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
> https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
> summarized here:
>
> http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/
>
> "People spent more time on Wikipedia’s mobile site than any other news
> or information site in Knight’s analysis, about 13 minutes per month
> for the average visitor. CNN wasn’t too far behind, at 9 minutes 45
> seconds per month. BuzzFeed clocked in third at 9 minutes 21 seconds
> per month. (BuzzFeed, however, slays both CNN and Wikipedia in time
> spent with the sites’ apps, compared with mobile websites. BuzzFeed
> users devote more than 2 hours per month to its apps, compared with
> about 46 minutes among CNN app users and 31 minutes among Wikipedia
> app loyalists.)
>
> Another way to look at Wikipedia’s influence: Wikipedia reaches almost
> one-third of the total mobile population each month, according to
> Knight’s analysis, which used data from the audience-tracking firm
> Nielsen."
>
>
> --
> Tilman Bayer
> Senior Analyst
> Wikimedia Foundation
> IRC (Freenode): HaeB
>
> ___
> Mobile-l mailing list
> mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
*Iván Martínez*

*Presidente - Wikimedia México A.C.User:ProtoplasmaKid *

// Mis comunicaciones respecto a Wikipedia/Wikimedia pueden tener una
moratoria en su atención debido a que es un voluntariado.
// Ayuda a proteger a Wikipedia, dona ahora: https://donate.wikimedia.org
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

[Wikimedia-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms of popularity"

2016-05-11 Thread Pine W 
Forwarding since this may be of general interest regarding Wikipedia
readership.

Thanks Tilman!

Pine

-- Forwarded message --
From: Tilman Bayer 
Date: Wed, May 11, 2016 at 10:23 AM
Subject: [WikimediaMobile] "Among mobile sites, Wikipedia reigns in terms
of popularity"
To: mobile-l 
Cc: Wikimedia developers , Analytics Team -
Internal 


New study (US only) by the Knight Foundation:
https://medium.com/mobile-first-news-how-people-use-smartphones-to ,
summarized here:
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2016/05/people-love-wikipedia/482268/

"People spent more time on Wikipedia’s mobile site than any other news
or information site in Knight’s analysis, about 13 minutes per month
for the average visitor. CNN wasn’t too far behind, at 9 minutes 45
seconds per month. BuzzFeed clocked in third at 9 minutes 21 seconds
per month. (BuzzFeed, however, slays both CNN and Wikipedia in time
spent with the sites’ apps, compared with mobile websites. BuzzFeed
users devote more than 2 hours per month to its apps, compared with
about 46 minutes among CNN app users and 31 minutes among Wikipedia
app loyalists.)

Another way to look at Wikipedia’s influence: Wikipedia reaches almost
one-third of the total mobile population each month, according to
Knight’s analysis, which used data from the audience-tracking firm
Nielsen."


--
Tilman Bayer
Senior Analyst
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

___
Mobile-l mailing list
mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,