On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 11:35 PM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com> wrote: > Oliver Keyes wrote: >> >> "active editors" == "editors with > [5/10/depending on standard] edits a >> month". It's pretty impossible, at our end, for us to identify one person >> between multiple IPs or one person between multiple IPs. > > Why can't you use behavioral and expertise characteristics to measure > the proportion of anonymous IP editors who edit with the same > distinguishing attributed and skill as active long term editors, as > below, in order to estimate their active proportion? The assertion > that you can't is like saying you can't count black swans unless you > can get their feathers in a centrifuge to check the pigment chemically > simply because it's dark at nighttime. <snip>
I've had essentially the same thought. One doesn't even have to be very sophisticated at this to get a rough impression. For example, comparing the percentage of anons who add templates to the fraction of normal users who add templates would already be suggestive. Other markers of sophistication like adding images or refs could also be useful. Less complex tasks like communicating on talk pages might also offer some information (though I suspect people who choose to be anonymous might be less inclined to use talk pages regardless of other experience / ability). -Robert Rohde _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
