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. this is now live!
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)
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.
- 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)
- This is now live - see Special:WikiaStats :) 13:40, 26 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. -- 20:17, 18 September 2008 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
All the screwy stats are back! The fixes didn't stick, somehow... Blue Rook 17:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Now most if it seems to be fixed, woot. However, three sections aren't loading anymore, at least for me. They are "Most edited articles (> 25 edits)" and "Registered editor activity breakdown", and the article-size selector section. I'm unsure if this is simply some problem on my end, this time, but am reporting it to be thorough. Blue Rook 21:28, 25 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)
- 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".
- 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)
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)
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. — MrDolomite • Talk 12:35, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks! 13:53, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
Anonimous editor activity breakdown
Most edited articles
- 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)
Okay update on this: we've split the most edited section into content namespaces and other namespaces. As for local translations, that would require a fair chunk of extra development - so it's noted, but on the backburner for now. 17:33, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
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:
DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
Site coded as XHTML. That is ok.
<td class="rb" nowrap>1%</td>
"nowrap" many often written as HTML.
<span style="padding:5px 2px;"><input type="button" id="ws-show-stats" name="ws-show-stats" value="Show statistics"></span>
Tag "input" was not closed before "span" closed. This is a bug for XHTML and allowed in HTML.
<span id="wk-stats-legend-values"><font color="#800000">x < 0%</font></span>
Huy, what's that? Some non escaped html "<" 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)
- 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)
- 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. And, with 600+ errors, this topped Sannse`s http://news.bbc.co.uk/ (only 375) ;-) —HenryNe 00:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- You are fast. Down to 57 Errors and 2 warnings, that it is better as before. Currently I see no problem from view. —HenryNe 23:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Outline broken on IE6
- The CSS is better for IE6 now. The side menu and Wiki logo is visible. —HenryNe 22:57, 25 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
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)
The Central Wikia version of WikiaStats is now live - see Special:WikiaStats! Please report any bugs. 13:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- One bug that is known is that under certain circumstances the second half of the statistics window gets left off. Until it's fixed, for now go back to the main window and choose "show statistics" first. 14:41, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wouldn't it be cool if it showed users contributions across Wikia and included all of the other stats as on single wikis? Maybe not eh, it would have little point, and they would rarely move. I just think it'd be cool. I presume it's perfectly possible, as the usual single-user statistics page appear to show. I Lion Heart I 19:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm tackling Special:WikiaStats these days and here are the problems I found:
- The decimal separator is incorrect (French uses the comma, not the period)---this may be a wider issue than just the WikiaStats page.
- The dates displayed in the Wikia's info block (and in the stats first line) do not follow user formatting preference.
- The "KB" used in the database size column, the "Kb" used two and three columns left of that, and the "kB" used for the size selection buttons near the bottom are inconsistent in English and not listed as translatable messages (French uses "o" for "octet" instead of "b/B" for "byte"). I strongly suspect the "K" has size 1024, so even in English it needs to become "Ki" (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_prefix for the rationale). Also the "MB" in the "Most edited articles" table.
- The month abbreviations are not taken from the MediaWiki strings (e.g. MediaWiki:Jun, etc.) and as a result June and July are indistinguishable.
- The abbreviation for the month of August ("aoû" in French) displays incorrectly: probably an encoding problem. This screws up the distribution/breakdown tables, cutting them short. The months of February ("fév") and December ("déc") are also problematic as the English Special:WikiaStats shows (French is too young for those months to be visible): the "é" seems to be followed by a DEL control character.
- Accented characters from any of the MediaWiki strings are not exported correctly to XLS. Occurences of "<br />" should be stripped from the exported strings as well.
- MediaWiki:wikiastats_more_200_ch is ignored (although it *is* exported to XLS).
- MediaWiki:wikiastats_username is ignored (unless MediaWiki:wikistats_user_namespace is used instead?)
- The "New per day" column header should be vertically centered like all others.
- The "0.5 Kb" and "2 Kb" column headers lose the space when exported to XLS.
- The Columns definitions need a space before the colon in French.
Polytherion 14:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- As a side note reply about "K" or "k" - K/k mean Kilo-<whatever> KB/kb = KiloBytes but we do not use "Ki" for any unit of measure that I know of - at least not in USA - ( Morph | Contribs | Talk ) 15:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ahh I just looked at the chart - and see your confusion - We don't use the IEC symbols - look to the far right of the chart we use the Binary symbols K = Kilo-<whatever> M = Mega-<whatever> T = Tera-<whatever> aka KB for KiloBytes MB for MegaBytes and so on -- ( Morph | Contribs | Talk ) 15:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- I strongly suggest you switch to the proper IEC symbols, as use of M to mean anything but one million is, at worst wrong, at best ambiguous. Likewise for K/k. But that's a separate debate. Polytherion 01:54, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hehe if it were only that simple - I can NOT change the system that the whole USA uses - USA is still not on Metric system - getting there but we still use Inches Feet Galons instead of Centimeter, Yard, Liters - the Usa uses Kb for KiloBytes or 3K we use 3 Mb for 3 Megabytes 3 Gb for 3 Gigabytes - that is the way of the USA - we do not ever conform to the World standards - we have to do everything in our own way - that is the mentality of USA -- ( Morph | Contribs | Talk ) 02:00, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Not quite true: the US has been metric since the 1970s, from a legal standpoint. In any case, that other issue has nothing to do with the misappropriation of metric prefixes by a subset of the computer science community. For instance, Americans that do a "5 K run" do *not* run for a 5 times 1024 meters! :-) Polytherion 11:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
Number of articles mismatch
http://zh-tw.guildwars.wikia.com/wiki/%E7%89%B9%E6%AE%8A:Statistics says there are 1212 legitimate content pages; http://zh-tw.guildwars.wikia.com/wiki/%E7%89%B9%E6%AE%8A:WikiaStats says there are 905. Another example: http://spore.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Statistics says 3442, http://spore.wikia.com/wiki/Special:WikiaStats says 2.8k. Why? --◄mendel► 16:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- Got a answer for you :) It's due to the more advanced calculation methods used in WikiaStats (e.g. a couple more things are ignored, like Wikia bots). 17:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you. That's weird, I wonder what kinds of pages can be legitimate with one scheme and "illegitimate" with the other. It's no big deal, though. --◄mendel► 21:43, 22 October 2008 (UTC)