Note that there is a user_properties_anon table on Tool Labs that has the gadget prefs, but I'm not sure this table exists or is populated for all wikis. @coren would know for sure.

That view should exist in all labs _p wiki databases: https://github.com/wikimedia/operations-software/blob/master/maintain-replicas/maintain-replicas.pl#L325-L330

There are no "global gadgets" yet. Any attempt at grouping local gadgets by name is doomed to fail.

There are no "global gadgets" yet. Any attempt at grouping local gadgets by name is doomed to fail.

@Ricordisamoa: Why is that? I'm pretty sure the old report grouped them by name.

@NiharikaKohli: Do you know where the old global gadget usage report is? I can't seem to find it.

Yep, here it is: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gadgets/wikipedia
Eran was kind enough to update it after I emailed him about it. But we should still look into setting it up for periodic updates.

In T115154#1716990, @kaldari wrote:

There are no "global gadgets" yet. Any attempt at grouping local gadgets by name is doomed to fail.

@Ricordisamoa: Why is that?

Even the most popular gadgets can have translated names (e.g. VarmaKato) or the same name but different contents (e.g. P2167), dependencies, etc.

Even the most popular gadgets can have translated names (e.g. VarmaKato) or the same name but different contents (e.g. P2167), dependencies, etc.

@Ricordisamoa: Oh yeah, I'm sure the groupings would never catch all duplication of gadgets, but it seems like some attempt at grouping would be better than just a raw list. What do you think of the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gadgets/wikipedia ?

In T115154#1722051, @kaldari wrote:

Even the most popular gadgets can have translated names (e.g. VarmaKato) or the same name but different contents (e.g. P2167), dependencies, etc.

@Ricordisamoa: Oh yeah, I'm sure the groupings would never catch all duplication of gadgets, but it seems like some attempt at grouping would be better than just a raw list. What do you think of the list at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gadgets/wikipedia ?

As you can see, it quickly becomes useless towards the bottom.

@Ricordisamoa: I agree that the long tail becomes pretty useless. Do you have any suggestions for how to make that report more useful? Should we limit it to the 100 most popular gadgets? Should we list every gadget on a separate wiki as a separate gadget? (Keep in mind we will also have T115152 at some point.) Do you think that report is even useful for the community? I definitely think it's useful for the Community Tech team at least :)

I wonder, @eranroz, have you set this report up for auto-updation yet? Ref: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Gadgets/wikipedia

The script should run on regular basis each month.
The ugly but working code: https://github.com/eranroz/wiki-gadgets-statistics
You are welcome to improve it and suggest better ways to group them.

• It may be possible to improve it by showing only "active" gadgets (appear in gadgets-defintiion or some other message/config)
• It is possible to better group gadgets based on their content, for example by using difflib. Not sure about its ROI

Personally, I'm fine with the report as it is (as long as it's going to be updated). I'll close this task as resolved. Thanks @eranroz!

In T115154#1722261, @kaldari wrote:

@Ricordisamoa: I agree that the long tail becomes pretty useless. Do you have any suggestions for how to make that report more useful?

In T115154#1726257, @eranroz wrote:

• It is possible to better group gadgets based on their content, for example by using difflib. Not sure about its ROI

We might also wait for Global Gadgets™ then...

Thanks @eranroz!