Indeed. For transparency, Joseph, Andrew and myself had a meeting late
last week to talk about how we handle these issues. The resolution was
to go for positive, as well as negative, checking, probably using
Christian's "guard" framework.
So, for example, suppose we want to make sure projects are
Tilman Bayer, 22/08/2015 19:33:
And I know that other issues were caught by ErikZ's proactive vigilance,
which will need to find an equivalent in the upcoming replacement for
Wikistats.
+1
Nemo
___
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.or
To add a bit:
First, regarding to the initial technical discussion about the pageview
definition used for pageview_hourly:
It now seems that apart from Outreach wiki, it differs from the earlier
Cube v0.5 data also regarding the inclusion of mediawiki.org and
wikimediafoundation.org, see https://
Tilman, to answer your question, the presentation of analytics at Monthly
Metrics Meetings will change month to month. Next month I am on vacation
so I have asked Jon to present something. I'm assuming it will have
Pageviews and be readership focused - it's up to Jon.
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 4:
This seems perfect. Is it currently used?
On 17 August 2015 at 18:03, Andrew Otto wrote:
> BTW, Christian foresaw this issue and wrote this:
> https://github.com/wikimedia/analytics-refinery-source/tree/master/guard
>
> It should be useable for pageviews too, I think. For this issue, a guard
>
BTW, Christian foresaw this issue and wrote this:
https://github.com/wikimedia/analytics-refinery-source/tree/master/guard
It should be useable for pageviews too, I think. For this issue, a guard that
made sure that outreach.wikimedia.org never appeared would have been an error.
> On Aug 17
>
> Yeah, I wasn't talking about review in the sense of using it, I was
> talking about review in the sense of actively looking for issues.
Makes sense. Thanks!
___
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman
On 17 August 2015 at 16:20, Adam Baso wrote:
>> Whose job is it to review pageviews and update the definition when
>> issues are found?
>
>
> I see the thread evolved a bit today. But I'll note this for people going
> through the archives:
>
> There seem to be a few levels of review of pageviews.
>
> Whose job is it to review pageviews and update the definition when
> issues are found?
I see the thread evolved a bit today. But I'll note this for people going
through the archives:
There seem to be a few levels of review of pageviews. There's been stuff
for the monthly metrics meetings (e.
On 17 August 2015 at 13:48, Joseph Allemandou wrote:
> Hey Oliver,
>
> The analytics team is responsible for the pageview definition.
> When finding issues, sending an email to the analytics mailing list is the
> right thing to do :)
>
Indeed; my point is not about issues reported upstream. My po
Hey Oliver,
The analytics team is responsible for the pageview definition.
When finding issues, sending an email to the analytics mailing list is the
right thing to do :)
On our end, we could surely do a better job to communicate changes in the
pageview definition code for anybody interested to r
You should also note that donate-wiki pageviews are making it into the
counts (again, the definition was designed to exclude these).
Whose job is it to review pageviews and update the definition when
issues are found?
On 17 August 2015 at 10:32, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> Just to clarify; there is no
Just to clarify; there is no need to ask me before making changes
(obviously I find my approval for pageviews changes being sought
incredibly flattering, but I am not the only person involved in this
project ;p). What I'm more driving towards is directly informing
customers when the definition is a
Excellent; thank you.
On 17 August 2015 at 04:42, Joseph Allemandou wrote:
> Oliver,
>
> It was a mistake from me to add the 'outreach' subdomain without asking you.
>
> From a documentation perspective, the analytics team uses that place to
> document changes:
> https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wi
Oliver,
It was a mistake from me to add the 'outreach' subdomain without asking you.
>From a documentation perspective, the analytics team uses that place to
document changes:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Analytics/Data/Webrequest and I didn't
know about up-to-date documentation you sent.
Ah, I see the problem; someone patched it and never documented it.
We have documentation at
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Page_view/Generalised_filters
of the generalised filters. There is also a log, on
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Page_view, of changes to the
pageview defi
The new one.
The code that generates it -
-
https://github.com/wikimedia/analytics-refinery/blob/master/hive/pageview/hourly/create_pageview_hourly_table.hql
-
https://github.com/wikimedia/analytics-refinery/tree/master/oozie/pageview/hourly
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Oliver Keyes wrot
Is the pageviews_hourly table meant to contain pageviews according to
the new or old definition? If old, where can I find aggregates for the
new one?
--
Oliver Keyes
Count Logula
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Analytics mailing list
Analytics@lists.wikimedia
18 matches
Mail list logo
