Re: [Wikitech-l] Broken validation statistics
On 27 June 2010 20:34, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > Reviewing the logs I am unable to find even a single article with a > wait anywhere near that. > > Can you find one? I'm not sure which logs to review. The "Advanced Review Log" doesn't distinguish between edits by new registered users and edits by anons, and only the latter are included in the statistics (why is that, by the way?). There also isn't an easy way to see how long it took to review (you have to calculate it manually for every row). ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Broken validation statistics
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 3:24 PM, Thomas Dalton wrote: > What's broken about it? It seems very odd to me that the mean is an > order of magnitude greater than the 95th percentile, but otherwise it > all looks fine. I suspect there are a few invalid data points messing > with the mean - perhaps pending changes is being turned off on > articles while there are unreviewed edits and they are counting as > being unreviewed for ages? (Or perhaps only if PC is turned back on > again for that article and they are eventually reviewed days after > being made.) > > If that is the problem, then I would suggest disallowing turning off > PC on an article with revisions still pending. Alternatively, turning > off PC could automatically approve any pending changes. Reviewing the logs I am unable to find even a single article with a wait anywhere near that. Can you find one? By day two or so it was showing an average of several days during some hours. Some people speculated that in cases where no edits had been made since PC was activated it was simply taking the time between the prior two versions or something like that. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Broken validation statistics
What's broken about it? It seems very odd to me that the mean is an order of magnitude greater than the 95th percentile, but otherwise it all looks fine. I suspect there are a few invalid data points messing with the mean - perhaps pending changes is being turned off on articles while there are unreviewed edits and they are counting as being unreviewed for ages? (Or perhaps only if PC is turned back on again for that article and they are eventually reviewed days after being made.) If that is the problem, then I would suggest disallowing turning off PC on an article with revisions still pending. Alternatively, turning off PC could automatically approve any pending changes. On 27 June 2010 20:19, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > Is anyone working on fixing the broken output from > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ValidationStatistics ? > > I brought this up on IRC a week-ish ago and there was some speculation > as to the cause but it wasn't clear to me if anyone was working on > fixing it. > > ___ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] Broken validation statistics
Is anyone working on fixing the broken output from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ValidationStatistics ? I brought this up on IRC a week-ish ago and there was some speculation as to the cause but it wasn't clear to me if anyone was working on fixing it. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
