Closing this as resolved as this work is basically completed. If we need additional changes or follow ups, @MMiller_WMF can either reopen this or file a new task.

@kostajh : I think we can decline this. The second question seems to have been answered by the work we've done with improving performance. As for the first one, I think that's for @MMiller_WMF to decide. I think it would be quick to get an estimate of what that proportion is, but I'm also not sure it's something we're particularly concerned about.

From the analytics perspective, I think there's three things we need to consider:

I went through our measurement specifications, the Newcomer Tasks reporting notebook, and also considered what data we use for various analysis. This change should cause us no problems.

@CBogen and @mwilliams : Could you both read through the task description and correct things and check boxes where needed? I'm unsure who'll be the manager signing off on this, but I'm sure you can figure that out :)

@mforns : Sure thing! Sorry about the confusion, once I noticed that the parent task was set to the one that I created to summarize all the EventLogging-related work it made sense why this would look like another task for someone from AE to work on.

Moving this to the Analytics Radar, for the same reasons as I just moved T275172. This is for a Growth engineer to pick up once the child task has progressed enough for the window to be shorted.

Moving this to the Analytics radar and reassigning to me. The Welcome Survey aggregation needs to be streamlined and set up for monthly updates, and this task is for me to get that done. I also changed the parent task to T275171, which is the task for the Growth engineers to pick up when the aggregation is done and we can safely shorten the window.

In T258413#6837869, @CBogen wrote:

In T258413#6837821, @Ottomata wrote:

Hi @CBogen, do you need direct access to data in Hadoop and Hive, or will you just be using Superset to access that data via Presto / Druid? >

Pretty sure I just need Superset access to that data via Presto / Druid, but @nettrom_WMF can you confirm? Thanks!

I'm reopening this task as we've now got visualizations/dashboards in Superset that @CBogen needs access to, and these require the group membership requested in this task.

I think I'd like to draw up some different scenarios (using images as the example media) and go through what edit tags end up getting applied, just to make sure I've got this right.

I updated the task description to make the ask clear. I've also updated the description of the parent task to make it clearer what we're looking to do, and create a new child task for the part that didn't already have one. Hopefully this makes everything less confusing, but please let me know if it didn't and I'll do my best to help out!

@fdans : The parent task asks to revert the changes made in T237124. There's also the second child task, T273826, for updating the whitelist. Once those two are completed, we can delete the associated four tables in event_sanitized, which is what this task is about. I'll update the task description to reflect that specific ask. I see now that all of this hasn't been very clear, maybe I should make a new parent task that lays all of this out and mentions all of the child tasks in the description?

This has been completed, here's the update I gave to Connie, Kate, and Marshall in preparation for the Q2 Tuning Session:

The first two parts of this is done and the rough draft is shared with Marshall.

@CBogen and I discussed this in our sync meeting today, as reflected in the updated task description. I've added T258834 as a subtask of this one, because having the SDC data queryable in the Data Lake will help us answer key questions about the richness of it.

The survey has completed and the code has been removed. We've gathered the data and analyzed it, finding mixed results. The team is working on following up this to gather feedback from other user groups. As far as I can tell, this task can be resolved.

This is no longer blocked as the instrumentation is deployed.

The goal of this task is unclear, which makes it difficult to prioritize it. If we are to undertake this work, we need to know more about how building this dashboard will help inform the org or drive decisions. This is partly because there's already tracking of the number of files with at least one structured data element (T238878#5692516, productionized in T239565, see also T247101), which arguably tracks the growth of SDC. For now, I'll move this to the upcoming quarter for a future revisit.

It's unclear when we can make this a priority. Moving it to the upcoming quarter for now.

Shared the data with @CBogen and @Ramsey-WMF for review.

Discovered this was stuck in the PA team's tracking category. Moved to kanban and into "doing" as I'm about to grab the data.

In T263757#6729160, @egardner wrote:

Now that we have a schema for mediasearch_interaction, we'll need to update it to account for concept-chip-related actions. This means we'll need to update the schema. My question is, how do we version such an update? 1.1? 2.0? @nettrom_WMF any thoughts?

I've resolved all the issues we had with the earlier draft of the notebook and handed it back to Marshall for testing and feedback.

In T264940#6710347, @kaldari wrote:

However, the ORES model is known for being biased against IP editors.

@jwang - This seems like an extremely important detail. Can you elaborate on it? I skimmed through the paper you cited, but didn't see anything about it.

Moving this into the current quarter on the Product Analytics board since I'll be chatting with @Miriam about this some time soon.

In T269786#6697466, @Tgr wrote:

We could disable Growth features when the campaign parameter is used, instead of using our own. Would that be wanted though? In the feature, we expect some campaigns to build on our homepage features.

What happens if someone wants to disable growth features and log the fact that the account creation was part of some campaign?

This analysis is now ready for review. I've uploaded the notebook with the analysis to GitHub.

All the notebooks related to this analysis are now in the Growth homepage repository. The filenames all start with the task number of this phab task.

The draft report now includes analysis of all questions, including the proportion of users who view the full newcomer tasks module on mobile. It also has similar measurements from the Variant A/B experiment analysis for comparison. Handing this task off to @MMiller_WMF for final review and sign off while I go review all the notebooks and put them on GitHub.