On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Brian <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 9:55 PM, Robert Rohde <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Thu, Sep 17, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Steve Bennett <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Robert Rohde <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> That particular result is unpublished. I could make you a list of >> >> infrequently viewed articles, but it would be quite long. >> > >> > Could you make a list of the 100 least viewed? Or are there are large >> > number which are essentially equal? >> >> My sample consisted of collating 30 non-consecutive hours of data on >> enwiki traffic where each hour was randomly chosen from any point >> during the last 8 months. This was filtered to only include page >> titles that were valid mainspace pages. >> >> In those 30 hours, there are 1.36 million valid article titles that >> are viewed exactly once [1]. >> >> Examples include: >> >> 129342_Ependes >> 1421_in_literature >> Antiprotonic_helium >> Antonella_Mularoni >> Madhusoodhanan_Nair >> Blue_Murder_(play) >> Ozonotherapy >> Veronika_Krausas >> Verret,_New_Brunswick >> Bare_Truth_(Nat_album) >> >> As you can see, these are obscure topics, but they are not necessarily >> crazy topics. If I were to repeat it with a longer baseline (say 1000 >> hours rather than 30) I'm suspect you might get more interesting >> information on the tail, but right now probably the best I can say is >> that a cumulatively significant amount of traffic goes to relatively >> obscure pages. >> >> -Robert Rohde >> >> [1] Note: Because the traffic data is based on url request stings, and >> some url strings map to the same pages, i.e. Blue_Ocean and >> Blue%20Ocean, the number of valid article titles in not necessarily >> the same as the number of distinct pages. For practical reasons my >> analysis was based of the url strings, and so probably over counts the >> number of distinct articles involved, and to a degree overstates the >> fraction of traffic to obscure pages. > > > How sure are you that they were viewed by a person and not a bot?
There is no differentiation between people and bots. (Some of these things are why it is an unpublished analysis. ;-) I was actually using traffic data for a totally different purpose, but decided to look at things likes like obscure pages, while I was at it.) -Robert Rohde _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
