Very nice. Do you think that you could pick out a few of your favorite graphs and add them to this week's Recent Research report in a gallery? Thanks! Pine Hey all! We've released a highly-aggregated dataset of readership data - specifically, data about where, geographically, traffic to each of our projects (and all of our projects) comes from. The data can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1317408 - additionally, I've put together an exploration tool for it at https://ironholds.shinyapps.io/WhereInTheWorldIsWikipedia/ Hope it's useful to people! -- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics

Great job. Who knew Esperanto was big in Japan and China at #2 and #3? On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 4:06 PM, Oliver Keyes <okeyes(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l

I am surprised that the new data, with crawlers excluded, show more wp:en traffic from US (43%) than the old data (36.4% for 2014), which contained much crawler traffic, presumably most of that from US. Compare https://ironholds.shinyapps.io/WhereInTheWorldIsWikipedia/ and http://stats.wikimedia.org/wikimedia/squids/SquidReportPageViewsPerLan guageBreakdown.htm Any thoughts? Erik -----Original Message----- From: analytics-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:analytics-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Oliver Keyes Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2015 22:37 To: Research into Wikimedia content and communities Cc: A mailing list for the Analytics Team at WMF and everybody who has an interest in Wikipedia and analytics. Subject: Re: [Analytics] [Wiki-research-l] [Release] The one major caveat, I think, is that the danger of proportionate data is that it makes small projects very vulnerable to artificial traffic spikes. I'd go out on a limb and say that some of the massive bumps in popularity we see in particular combinations are likely due to either undetected automata or simply a project having so little traffic that a small number of people can sway the results outlandishly. On 25 February 2015 at 16:32, Andrew Lih <andrew.lih(a)gmail.com> wrote: -- Oliver Keyes Research Analyst Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics _______________________________________________ Analytics mailing list Analytics(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics

Erik Zachte, 25/02/2015 23:34: Ironholds' looks more vulnerable to bots, it's easier to see in small wikis (though, kudos! many more small wikis are included than in wikistats). For instance, 20 more percentage points for USA on Breton and Bavarian Wikipedias, 30 on Welsh, 40 on Alemannic, almost 50 on Kurdish. For Chinese bots they look similar, though in some cases I'm not sure what's going on: for instance als.wiki also sees CH and RO emerge. Will the new pageviews definition use the same bot filtering method? Nemo _______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l