In T308903#7946122, @JJMC89 wrote:

Authorship is only supported for articles (namespace 0).

Related discussion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Autorship_data_missing_from_userspace_articles?

@Milimetric To put things in context, such data is useful for studies of Wikimedia community, which I believe do have usefulness for the community itself. Here are two of my papers which care about editors by country numbers, to give you an idea of what those studies look like: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1461444818779080 , https://brill.com/view/journals/ajss/48/1-2/article-p115_7.xml

@Milimetric Thanks for the replies. I am not sure what privacy concerns exist here (I did read the linked page and I assume you refer to the section 'No exact counts'), but perhaps there is a misunderstanding. I mean, why do we divide the editor brackets into '5 to 99 edits' and '100+'? This is a restrictive methodological choice. If there are privacy concerns with providing data for smaller numbers ('1-5'), then a single '1-99' should be fine, and preferably, we should be able to get a gradual scale (let's say, 1-10', '11'-20', '21-30'), etc.

This request is related to the Wikipedia discussion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#c-The_wub-2022-01-28T12%3A32%3A00.000Z-Piotrus-2022-01-28T11%3A31%3A00.000Z

In T174388#6764402, @Aklapper wrote:

@Piotrus: Please feel free to improve the proposed patch if you'd like to see progress. Thanks.

This is still a major issue that needs attention.

See red links for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:School_and_university_projects/User:Piotrus/Educational_projects for broken pages (links to my courses) that contained various information like student lists, their projects, etc.

PS. Actually, just today I was updating a syllabus for a class I will be teaching 2morrow and I noticed it contained a link to a dead page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_Program:Hanyang_University/Information_Sociology_Project:_Exploring_Korea_through_Wikivoyage_(Fall_2015)

I am not impressed by how this was handled. First my course pages were deleted, with no sufficient warning (no email / personalized talk page message telling me to archive stuff), and after half a year the only reply is to archive this without even bothering to check with me if this has been fixed?

As a instructor who lost many course pages to this, I am quite unhappy. Instructors (stakeholders) where IMHO never consulted properly. It is one think to lock a mechanism and tell people to move to the newer version, but deleting historical pages with lists of students, articles grading guidelines, is a loss. See how my page at was gutted from useful links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Piotrus/Educational_project_results