Fascinating, Johan. Can you describe the ranking a bit? It's very interesting to see that the Chernobyl disaster had a 388% increase, but I don't understand why it would be in a top 10 list among others whose upticks were in the thousands and millions of percentage points.
I do see on your "About Wikitrends" page that "Ranking is a measurement based on both absolute and relative increase of page views." I would suggest that having that statement (perhaps with a tiny bit more detail) in the header for the Wikitrends page itself (above the ranked articles) would be very helpful; and that on the "About" page, it would be nice to have a more detailed explanation of how the articles are ranked. Regardless, a very interesting tool, highlighting a revealing collection of articles people are reading. -Pete On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Johan Gunnarsson wrote: > Cool. See also: > > http://toolserver.org/~johang/wikitrends/english-uptrends-this-week.html > > It has more languages, longer time spans and a bit more sophisticated > ranking algorithm. > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 17:14, Magnus Manske > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Top 50 viewed articles per hour, now aggregated and browsable: >> >> http://toolserver.org/~magnus/toptopics.php >> >> Currently en.wp and de.wp only. Backfilled 5 days. Will be updated >> every hour automatically from now on. API coming soon-ish. >> >> Cheers, >> Magnus >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikipedia-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikipedia-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l Pete Forsyth [email protected] 503-383-9454 mobile _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
