Page MenuHomePhabricator

Wikistats active editors metric reporting unrealistic numbers
Closed, ResolvedPublic

Description

E.g. https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/hu.wikipedia.org/contributing/active-editors/normal|line|all|~total|monthly

Monthly active editors is claimed to be in the 4K-7K range; the wiki defines the metric as "The count of registered, non-bot editors with five or more edits in a given month". But MediaWiki's own https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics says 1654 active editors (that's editors with one or more edits in the last 30 days); per old Wikistats the 5+ active number should be somewhere around the 500 range. Something seems quite broken here.

Event Timeline

Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald Transcript
razzi triaged this task as High priority.
razzi moved this task from Incoming to Wikistats on the Analytics board.

Is there a timeline for a fix for this? I need the correct numbers for Wikidata for a book chapter in the next week and I'm wondering how to move on.

Just a reminder that if numbers for active editors are needed, one just have to use the Editors metric, filtering for user, 5+ edits. See this link:

https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/de.wikipedia.org/contributing/editors/normal|line|2-year|(editor_type)~user+(activity_level)~5..24-edits*25..99-edits*100..-edits|monthly

Change 640252 had a related patch set uploaded (by Fdans; owner: Fdans):
[analytics/wikistats2@master] Consider locked dimensions when exploding keys for AQS url

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/640252

Change 640252 merged by jenkins-bot:
[analytics/wikistats2@master] Consider locked dimensions when exploding keys for AQS url

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/640252

Just a reminder that if numbers for active editors are needed, one just have to use the Editors metric, filtering for user, 5+ edits. See this link:

https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/de.wikipedia.org/contributing/editors/normal|line|2-year|(editor_type)~user+(activity_level)~5..24-edits*25..99-edits*100..-edits|monthly

Thank you! I had not thought of that. That solves my immediate need.

Checked the URL on top, this is now fixed in production