User talk:WereSpielChequers/100+ editors

Real World events

I moved "* Real world events. The presidential debates began in early August 2015, and the presidential election has well over a dozen strong candidates, an almost-unheard of situation. There is no incumbent in 2016, either. " from the list of factors to here because as far as I can see that could change the actual amount of editing in a month, but not change things in retrospect, and this page is trying to work out what changes the measured figures for editing after they have been measured. That would change if we introduced the concept of temporary notability or notability being too early to ascertain. So for example if we deemed all premier team members notable, but deleted their articles if they left the squad without playing for the first team, then there would be increased attrition as more articles were deleted. Ϣere SpielChequers 16:21, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Possible causes of change" and redirects

Thanks for the diligent list of possible causes for retroactive changes. FYI, I filed a bug a while ago about such discrepancies in the closely related case of the global active (5+) editor numbers: phab:T87738

I'm not sure if conversion of a page into a redirect (or vice versa) makes a difference for the very active (or active) editors numbers. As explained in more detail at mw:Analytics/Metric definitions, many metrics are calculated based on the "stub" dumps, not the full dumps, i.e. only take the metadata from the revision history into account, not the content of each revision. AFAIK, this includes the active/very active editor numbers, and means that edits to redirect pages are included for the purpose of these metrics.

Regards, Tbayer (WMF) (talk) 21:48, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, redirect status doesn't matter AFAIK. Nemo 22:37, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. From the level of change I've been seeing in the last few months it is beginning to look like once we know a month's editing level, subsequent net change from all factors is fairly trivial. As one would expect there is a bit of an initial drop, this is presumably from the deletion process which largely involves new articles, and some of the deletion taggers and categorizers are presumably just dropping below the 100 threshold after those deletions happen. But this is miniscule. No problem if it turns out that redirecting doesn't lose edits from these stats. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Undeletions

Undeletions were less than a thousand last month, there've been a quarter of a million since Dec 2004. The average in that time was twice as high as the last month, but I'm pretty sure that undeletion won't have that huge an impact on these figures. Firstly some undeletions take place in the same month as the deletion and therefore won't affect the figures. Some undeletions are outside mainspace, mainly in userspace. Some undeletions are done as part of history merges when you delete, move and restore - these don't affect the stats. Before revision deletion when you needed to delete specific deletions you had to delete the page, then restore everything you didn't want to delete; apart from copyvio, revision deletion shouldn't have much effect on these stats as the sort of people whose mainspace edits needed deletion were likely to get blocked long before 100 edits. Ϣere SpielChequers 23:51, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]