That is a lot more than I was expecting from my random samples, I was expecting total V/E edits to be somewhere near 1% of mainspace edits, More than 10% of the most active editors using it surprises me. But if you go to 100 in that list you find people doing 33 V/E edits in those thirty days - these are all people who did over a 100 edits in those thirty days, and the vast majority of them will have done even fewer V/E edits. So it would be interesting to see what percentage of these people's edits use V/E, if it is typically 33 then it will be around 3% - probably not enough to be a major factor in such an increase in edits.
This sample is after all the promotion of V/E at wikimania and subsequently on mailing lists and signpost. I would be surprised if as many of these editors were using V/E in the first 6 months of this year -(I'm 4th on that list and I don't think I had more than a handful of V/E edits in the 25 months before this summer's Wikimania) . On 18 August 2015 at 01:04, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote: > I asked her and yes the VE has made a big difference > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Megalibrarygirl#Using_the_Visual_Editor > (for what I said) > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kerry_Raymond#Visual_Editor (for > her reply) > > > > So, one success story! > > > > Kerry > > > > *From:* Kerry Raymond [mailto:kerry.raym...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, 18 August 2015 9:37 AM > *To:* 'Research into Wikimedia content and communities' < > wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > *Subject:* RE: [Wiki-research-l] Has the recent increase in English > wikipedia's core community gone beyond a statistical blip? > > > > Woo hoo! I’m #9 in the table! But seriously that’s probably less than 10% > of my edits. For that same group, what percentage of their edits does the > VE represent? I notice that #1 on the list User:Megalibrarygirl appears > to be using VE almost exclusively at the present, but started out on the > source editor. Interestingly I notice that among her recent non-VE edits > mention adding infoboxes in the edit summary (which is something which is a > total pain in the VE). This user has also massively increased her number of > edits recently, might be interesting to know if the VE is a factor in this. > I will ask her. > > > > Kerry > > > > *From:* wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [ > mailto:wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org > <wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org>] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan > Morgan > *Sent:* Tuesday, 18 August 2015 4:11 AM > *To:* Research into Wikimedia content and communities < > wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org> > *Subject:* Re: [Wiki-research-l] Has the recent increase in English > wikipedia's core community gone beyond a statistical blip? > > > > It looks like about 10% of highly active Enwiki editors have used VE in > the past month (across all namespaces): > http://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/4795 > > > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:35 AM, WereSpielChequers < > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On a very non-scientific measure of how few editors currently use V/E, I > took some snapshots of the most recent 500 mainspace edits > <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&limit=500&days=30>yesterday > and was getting circa 1% tagged as visual editor, I've just run two sample > this afternoon and the first had not a single edit tagged Visual editor and > the other only four, so unless some of those experienced users using V/e > have opted out of having their edits tagged V/E, I'm assuming "gobs and > gobs" are either on other language wikis, heavily skewed to a time of day I > haven't sampled or big in number but still too small a proportion to > account for the increase in the number of editors doing >100 edits per > month. > > > > On 17 August 2015 at 15:54, Jonathan Morgan <jmor...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > There are gobs and gobs* of people using VE. Many of them are experienced > editors. > > > > I'm also interested in looking at VE adoption over time (especially by > veteran editors). I'll sniff around and let y'all know if I find anything. > > > > No idea what might be causing the boost in active editor numbers. But it's > exciting to see :) > > > > Anyone else have data that bears on these questions? > > > > - J > > > > *non-scientific estimate drawn from anecdata > > > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 9:53 AM, WereSpielChequers < > werespielchequ...@gmail.com> wrote: > > That's an interesting theory, but are there many people actually using V/E > now? > > I've just gone back through recent changes looking for people using it, > and apart from half a dozen newbies I've welcomed I'm really not seeing > many V/E edits. > > Looking at the history of Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback > <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback&offset=&limit=500&action=history> > the last 500 edits go back three months. So apart from the Interior, you > and I Kerry I'm not sure there is a huge number of people testing it, and I > wasn't testing it in the first 6 months of this year. I did see some > research where they were claiming that retention rates for V/E editors were > now as good as for people using the classic editor, but I would be > surprised if there were enough people using V/E to make a difference to > these figures, especially as this is about the editors doing over 100 edits > a month. > > I agree it would be interesting to track the take-up of the VE (fully or > partially) by editor by year of original signup. But I think the long > awaited boost from V?E editing is yet to come, if the regulars have started > to increase that is likely to be due to something else. > > > > Jonathan > > > > On 15 August 2015 at 15:11, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Is there any way of telling what proportion of these 8% appear to be using > the Visual Editor either exclusively or partially? It might be interesting > to track the take-up of the VE (fully or partially) by editor by year of > original signup. > > > > Kerry > > > > *From:* wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto: > wiki-research-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On Behalf Of * > WereSpielChequers > *Sent:* Saturday, 15 August 2015 11:12 PM > *To:* Research into Wikimedia content and communities < > wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org>; The Wikimedia Foundation Research > Committee mailing list <rco...@lists.wikimedia.org> > *Subject:* [Wiki-research-l] Has the recent increase in English > wikipedia's core community gone beyond a statistical blip? > > > > Hi, > > With 8% more editors contributing over 100 edits in June 2015 than in > June 2014 <https://stats.wikimedia.org/EN/TablesWikipediaEN.htm>, we have > now had six consecutive months where this particular metric of the core > community is looking positive. One or two months could easily be a > statistical blip, especially when you compare calender months that may have > 5 weekends in one year and four the next. But 6 months in a row does begin > to look like a change in pattern. > > As far as caveats go I'm aware of several of the reasons why raw edit > count is a suspect measure, but I'm not aware of anything that has come in > in this year that would have artificially inflated edit counts and brought > more of the under 100 editors into the >100 group. > > I know there was a recent speedup, which should increase subsequent edit > rates, and one of the edit filters got disabled in June, but neither of > those should be relevant to the Jan-May period. > > Would anyone on this list be aware of something that would have otherwise > thrown that statistic? > > Otherwise I'm considering submitting something to the Signpost. > > Regards > > Jonathan > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > > -- > > Jonathan T. Morgan > > Senior Design Researcher > > Wikimedia Foundation > > User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)> > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > > > > > > -- > > Jonathan T. Morgan > > Senior Design Researcher > > Wikimedia Foundation > > User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki-research-l mailing list > Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l > >
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
