Hi all,

Lars, Rupert thanks for flagging this and you are quite right: the numbers
are too high because webstatscollector, the software that does the counts,
just counts every request as a hit including bots, error pages etc.

I am planning on running a sprint at the Amsterdam Hackathon to built an
easy queryable datastore with clean pageview counts. Please let me know if
you are interested in this so I can pitch this.

Best,
Diederik


On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 3:36 PM, Lars Aronsson <[email protected]> wrote:

> On 02/14/2013 12:03 AM, rupert THURNER wrote:
>
>> this means 569 pages accessed in this hour, at least once.
>>
>
> Thanks for taking the time to do this check! This
> number already is unreasonable for an obscure project
> with 8000 articles.
>
>
>  da.d Speciel:Eksporter/engelsk 2 7818
>>
>
> Should Special:Export ever count as page views?
> Anyway, there are no humans using Special:Export
> on da.wiktionary in the middle of the night.
>
>
>  this means that e.g. "springer" was supposedly accessed 3 times in
>> that hour. the article does not exist, but there is a red link out of
>> http://da.wiktionary.org/wiki/**Wiktionary:Top_10000_(Dansk)<http://da.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Top_10000_(Dansk)>
>> .
>>
>
> So are there some stupid bots that follow red links?
> There could be a large number of such accesses
> on Wiktionary (in any language) because there
> are so many red links. But bots should never be
> counted among the page views.
>
>
>
> --
>   Lars Aronsson ([email protected])
>   Aronsson Datateknik - http://aronsson.se
>
>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to