--- El vie, 14/11/08, Erik Zachte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > De: Erik Zachte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Asunto: RE: [Wiki-research-l] "Regular contributor" > Para: "'Research into Wikimedia content and communities'" > <[email protected]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Fecha: viernes, 14 noviembre, 2008 2:40 > > Many bots that are active on many wikis are not registered > as such on > smaller wikis. > > Therefore I treat any user name that is registered as bot > on 10+ wikis as > bot on all wikis. >
Seems very reasonable :). > It is of course again an correction which is not 100% > accurate, but close I > might hope. > Paraphrasing one of my research colleagues: it's better something than nothing at all :). > Single User Logon can help in this respect some day. > Wow, man. That would let my model jump to the speedlight. If only I were capable of tracing users among different languages... > > > In theory we could spot some bots by their behavior, say a > user that edits > 24 hours per day, of manages 5 updates per second for a > long time, or added > thousands of articles in a short period. > > But I’m not sure it would be worth the effort, and it > would low priority in > any case. I also have my doubts about the filtering conditions. For instance, in eswiki, 'BOTpolicia' is not registered as such and it's responsible for more than 90.000 edits, so far. On the other hand, a famous user in eswiki (retired for this moment, id=13770 to be precise) is responsible for 100.000 edits, and was erroneously identified as a bot many times :). We have similar cases in other languages. Filtering by number of edits/hour or similar may require a lot of time/resources, specially in larger Wikipedias, (sorry, but for my thesis I'm mainly focused on the top-ten Wikipedias :) ). Honestly, I don't have a good answer for this right now. Best. F. > > > > Erik > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Ziko van > Dijk > Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 23:37 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Research into Wikimedia > content and > communities > Subject: Re: [Wiki-research-l] "Regular > contributor" > > > > Hello Felipe, > > Maybe we speak about different things now. At > http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/BotActivityMatrix.htm > > > de > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaDE.htm> > > ja > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaJA.htm> > > fr > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaFR.htm> > > it > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaIT.htm> > > pl > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaPL.htm> > > es > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaES.htm> > > nl > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaNL.htm> > > pt > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaPT.htm> > > ru > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaRU.htm> > > zh > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaZH.htm> > > sv > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaSV.htm> > > fi > <http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaFI.htm> > > > > > 8% > > 6% > > 22% > > 25% > > 26% > > 15% > > 29% > > 30% > > 26% > > 15% > > 23% > > 22% > > > The bot share of all edits is not that insignificant. > > Ziko > > > > 2008/11/13 Felipe Ortega <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Hi, Erik, and all. > > IMHO, it would be a good idea...but not definitely an > urgent one. In our > analyses on the top-ten Wikipedias, we found that bots > contributions > introduced very few noise in data (to be precise > statistically, it was not > significant at all). > > You also have the additional problem that some bots are not > identified in > the users_group table. > > My "practical impression" is that when you deal > with overall figures, then > bots are irrelevant. However, if you want to focus in > special metrics like > concentration indexes then their contribution DOES MATTER, > since a very > active bot in one month may ruin your measurments. > > Regards, > > Felipe. > > > --- El mié, 22/10/08, Erik Zachte > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > > > De: Erik Zachte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Asunto: [Wiki-research-l] "Regular > contributor" > > Para: [email protected] > > Fecha: miércoles, 22 octubre, 2008 9:55 > > > > Statistics, with "Wikipedians", > > "active" and "very active users"; > > > > > like often, Zachte's Statistics are great, > but > > easily misleading. > > > > > > > > Also keep in mind that most figures in wikistats still > > include bot edits. > > > > IMO it becomes more and more urgent to present > separate > > counts for humans > > and bots. > > > > > > > > For instance in eo: 54% of total edits for all time > were > > bot edits, but most > > > > of these will be from recent years, so the percentage > will > > be even higher > > > > for recent years. > > > > > > > > http://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/BotActivityMatrix.htm > > > > > > > > Erik Zachte > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Wiki-research-l mailing list > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > -- > Ziko van Dijk > NL-Silvolde _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
