Forum:WikiaStats feedback

For every wiki at Wikia, we generate statistics that track the number of new editors, the number of articles, and various other information important to the life-cycle of a wiki. These stats are much more detailed than the in-built MediaWiki statistics page found at Special:Statistics.

As Wikia has grown we have tried to improve our statistics package to our users more robust data. As part of our latest update, each wiki will receive a special page where any logged in user can view detailed statistical information about their wiki. In addition, a number of the statistics have had their methods of calculation updated to be more accurate. We hope this will aid users in deciding where to focus their efforts.

The new Wikia statistics pages can be found at Special:WikiaStats on each wiki. (Previously the information could be found on wikistats.wikia.com.) In addition, there will be a central WikiaStats page which allows you to look up any wiki's stats, at Special:WikiaStats on Central Wikia - however, this is not live just yet.

You can find out more about the new stats page at Help:WikiaStats on Wikia Help.

We would love to get your feedback on the new stats page - where it's not clear, numbers that don't look accurate, or suggestions for improvement. All feedback is useful! Thanks :) 18:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Date?
Is there a projected date for wikia-wide stats? I know the page is enabled to show edit stats for wikia.com, but from the message on my user page, it seemed like this page was going to incorporate stats from all wikis associated with Wikia. I'd love to know when/if I can expect this feature.

Thanks! &mdash; Nathan (Peteparker) (Earth-1218) (talk &bull; contribs &bull; email) 18:16, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Looks like we got a little too excited to tell you about that :) Few bugs to work out still on the consolidated view, but we hope to have it live next week. angies (talk) 03:17, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

difficult to read
I've got to say that while that chart may well contain more information, it's not adequately described and therefore useless to me Game widow 18:18, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure what you mean - can you point to specific problems? There is a section at the end to explain all the stats table columns. 13:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Month strings in Chinese characters display error?
In fx3, I just see that FFFD in box instated of Chinese characters (e.g. 9月 displays in 9�)--疾風綾希 18:33, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * On the Sims Wiki the months are displayed in French. -- a_morris 20:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The months are now in a different non-English language. -- a_morris 17:21, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The Harry Potter Wiki too. -- Freakatone Talk  20:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Think of it as an opportunity to learn a new language ;) (In seriousness, we'll get it looked at) 13:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Problem has been identified and will be fixed in the next update. 10:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Feedback
This is a great new feature, but I think the version at Wiki 24 needs some attention. In Other statistics: Registered editor activity breakdown, it lists 3 users who have little or no edits at the wiki ("Quasaur", "Migration conversion script", and "Psy Guy"). The next subheading, Anonymous editor activity breakdown, contains information about IPs who have never contributed. Another subheading, Most edited articles (> 25 edits), contains pages like "Prayer_Stories" that don't even exist at the wiki. Finally, the months are in French (I think) even though it says "Language: English" next to it. Basically, I think someone else's wiki stats are mistakenly at ours. Blue Rook 20:20, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * hmm. that's unsettling. looking into it. Thanks for the feedback! angies (talk) 03:12, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This is now fixed! (It was due to the all-numeric nature of the wiki name) 18:44, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! The Most edited articles (> 25 edits) part does seem to still be wacky, but the rest seems in good order. Blue Rook 22:58, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Also fixed :) 14:17, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

"recently absent registered editors"
I think that stat does not track edits outside the Main namespace. That probably should be spelled out, otherwise it's really confusing why I have been editing the wiki for the past two weeks but the stats says I haven't been around since May. (the present wording implies only the "Rank" filters by namespace, leading users to expect the "last edit" stat to include all namespaces). -User:PanSola(talk/history) 23:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Nice catch. Will fix that. angies (talk) 03:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * All columns apart from the "other" column are bases on the main namespace - we'll improve the wording. 10:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Spotlights in the Charts
Changed from Table to Charts and the Spotlights lands middle in the page, see Image:Statistic-spotlight-footers.png.


 * That's not good. Will fix that.

I can only say: Please disable the animations from this feature. The animation of this pics is mostly not visible, because the footer is out of screen on page load for mostly pages. And, if it's visible, than it's wrong! This cost only performance. My browser is Firefox 2.0 under Linux. —HenryNe 23:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)


 * What animation are you referring to? In the stats feature? angies (talk) 03:20, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * "Redraw" would be a better word as "animated" here all.
 * First, the page you try to present directly after the click on "Show Charts".
 * Image 0: Before click on "Show Charts"
 * Image 1: This page comes in the while the charts will calculate.
 * Image 2: Charts I can see now.
 * Here is not real animation, but you moved the page layout more as needed. Why needs change before the charts will see? The error position of Spotlights are exactly the positions from this middle step.


 * Second, I was thinking you does animate the fly-in of Spotlights in the old way. I feel, you have changed this now, and the Spotlights are displayed directly on the position. I have not seen, because they are mostly out of screen. But, in the end this is the same question. Why you not have a fix coded footer with relative position of the Spotlights pics? Why must they load and push with Java to view, after the browser displayed the page?


 * Third, the "Show Links stats" and "Show Images stats": The table was draw full and than you hiding some on load or after view. This cost time and a screen redraw. (redraw is better word as "animated" here). Because I can not see what you have hide in such short time, I (or any other user) will unhide this all as next step. This is a stupid user interface idea. Solution: Simple lets view in full mode as default. —HenryNe 01:03, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * It's not an animation, it's just the method used. The bottom boxes are removed, and then the stats in the top box are replaced by charts. I am not sure why the spotlights "forget" to change position - we'll get it looked at. 23:18, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I like the old stats better
Having to click everywhere to be able to see the data instead of being able to just scroll through the page takes away much of the pleasure of setting the statistics intervals. --◄mendel► 10:31, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * The problem is that it resets the open/close statuses each time you change the interval? The interval only affects the first box, so closing the subsequent boxes doesn't seem that strange. While I understand the point about everything not being there at first, it's partly to prevent information overload, and partly to reduce load time. 13:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Load time can not be. - Full tables are loaded, viewed and than hided by Java.—HenryNe 03:23, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * How about an "open all sections" button/link near the charts/tables nav? --◄mendel► 10:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Are you sure? The time to open the lower boxes is far longer than for a simple hide/show. Edit: after a quick check - the tables are not in the HTML source code, they are added via AJAX. 23:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Good job
The new page looks good and is much easier to navigate and drill down for additional information than the old page was. Will definitely provide additional feedback if anything looks amiss. Well done. &mdash; MrDolomite &bull; Talk 12:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks! 13:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll 1up that. Great job. Thanx. happypal (Talk) Admin@SupCom.wikia.com 19:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Anonimous editor activity breakdown
Putting a contribs link right next to the user name (in this case, IP number) could prove extremely useful, I think. happypal (Talk) Admin@SupCom.wikia.com 19:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Agreed, we'll see if that can be done. 23:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This has been changed for the next update. 11:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Most edited articles
Breaking the table down in name spaces could also prove interesting. happypal (Talk) Admin@SupCom.wikia.com 19:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)


 * That would indeed be useful - it will likely require a rewrite of the stats parser, so it will be something we'll aim for in a future release. 18:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

validator.w3.org
The main problem for Spotlights can also be your coding style (again). This is a mixture of XHTML (624 Errors, 7 warnings) and HTML (66 Errors, 78 warnings). Do you not known http://validator.w3.org/ ?

Here are some examples: Site coded as XHTML. That is ok. " nowrap " many often written as HTML. Tag " input " was not closed before "span" closed. This is a bug for XHTML and allowed in HTML. Huy, what's that? Some non escaped html " &#60; " characters! —HenryNe 02:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)


 * A common misconception is that pages have to be error free for them to work or be "correct". Sometimes, that is not the case, and may even be intentional for compatibility purposes. However, I'll get these looked at, in case they have an effect. 23:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Compatibility purposes? HTML errors could seriously break compatibility. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 18:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, IE6 is a strange beast (though I suppose that mostly affects CSS). Anyway, how did you manage to get so many errors - what situations? I am trying http://www.wowwiki.com/Special:WikiaStats (http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wowwiki.com%2FSpecial%3AWikiaStats&charset=(detect+automatically)&doctype=Inline&group=0) and I get 45 errors. 18:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yes, You only see the 45 errors from a very small (empty) Monaco page. - The same you would see as anon user. Enable "Show Source" to see what the validator gots from Wikia. validator.w3.org can not get Special:WikiaStats via http: link.
 * You needs to login to Wikia, goto Special:WikiaStats, use the browser menu "view html source", copy&paste this into the http://validator.w3.org/#validate_by_input —HenryNe 22:41, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Good point! Completely missed that, thanks :) I see a lot of them are the same problem repeated many times - they look fairly minor, fortunately. I'll pass that on. 11:57, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Kirkburn, you sayed "A common misconception is that pages have to be error free ..." → I know. I don't check all pages, and I don't test pages just for fun. After I have trouble on view, first I use this tool to check for syntax errors. Often problems I got from view, I have fixed by this tool. But, if there are to many errors - they can be harmless, then this tool can not help. In an over flooded error log the main error would be hidden for our eyes and the tool. That's why I forced such. [[Image:Creativehumor.png]] And, with 600+ errors, this topped Sannse`s http://news.bbc.co.uk/ (only 375) ;-) —HenryNe 00:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Indeed, thanks for checking - it's appreciated :) 12:28, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Outline broken on IE6
Hello, on Internet Explorer 6.0 it's totally broken, see screen shot.—HenryNe 21:22, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Charts ends with an error. After click on the exclamation point this is the text from error message:
 * Line: 13
 * Char: 114544
 * Error: 'Items [...].0' is Null or not an object

Chart bars have a problem with counts of "0" (Null). Bars exists with same high as count "1" before the wiki was started. You can see it in this screen shot —HenryNe 22:23, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Should be fixed for the next update. 12:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Lame bar drawings on charts
On IE6 the charts are draw with 2-5 bars per second. I can see how the bars draw. I assume that come from multiple internet connects after the page was load. I assume one internet connection per bar. On IE status bar I can see a countdown: "230 Elements needs load", "225 Elements needs load", "219 Elements needs load", ... (free translated from German "Noch 230 Elemente")

Total time of loading consumes 32 Seconds. The PC is more as idle, the network load is low.—HenryNe 21:34, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * That's very odd, it's pretty much instant on Firefox. Is it an IE6 only bug? 23:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Firefox 3 on same PC loads the bars ultra fast (less than a second). —HenryNe 00:25, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Total number of uploaded images (W)
In the Tables and Charts are 4 images uploaded before the wiki was founded? For example w:c:color:Special:WikiaStats. Open "Show Images stats", or goto #images on Charts to see it. (Direct link does not work) —HenryNe 22:10, 21 September 2008 (UTC)


 * This will be due to the starter kit uploads being counted. I've noticed the issue before - I'm not sure it's a serious issue as it is essentially correct (though a little odd on a per-wiki basis). Thanks for all your reports by the way! Very useful :) 23:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Registered editor activity breakdown too short
On the stats at http://wikistats.wikia.com/EN/TablesWikiaGWGUILD.htm under "recently active wikians" you can see I have contributed the second-most article edits in the last 30 days - but http://guildwars.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WikiaStats cuts off after 17 editors, this means that I am not listed. The other people's numbers don't tally well at all, either. May I also suggest that the date the statistics were created be listed in the infobox at the top? --◄mendel► 23:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Not sure why it's shorter - it may get longer over time. Agreed with moving the date the stats were generated - it is rather hidden at the moment (it's just under the main stats box). 12:13, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Update: currently the lists are shorter because it counts the last 50 total over the two lists (33 and 17 = 50). This will be changed to 50 and 50 :) 12:55, 23 September 2008 (UTC)