Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2015-01-28/From the editor

Discuss this story

Thank you, Ed! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 23:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Great upbeat editorial! Looking forward to continuing the magic - good luck! kosboot (talk) 00:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As a new editorial board member, I am instituting a new feature: Most edited articles over the past week. This is an innovative improvement over the Traffic report first and foremost because Facebook isn't always in the top five, and also because it's more relevant to the editing community. Enjoy. EllenCT (talk) 05:27, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting idea, EllenCT. Pinging Serendipodous, our regular traffic report writer for thoughts. Perhaps we could include this along with the most-viewed articles? Go Phightins! 03:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I guess, though perhaps Miss Ellen could offer to lend a hand, so that my workload isn't doubled. And just to keep her informed, Facebook isn't always in the top 5. In fact, it's barely been in the top five at all in the last few months. Serendi ^pod ous 11:15, 31 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the hyperbole, Serendipodous. I recommend that you publish the two top-20, side by side, with commentary on either, e.g.:

Rank	by Readers	Commentary	by Edits (Editors?*)	Commentary
1	Facebook	sheesh	Super Bowl IL	ugh
...				...
20	Deaths in 2015	A perennial favorite	Deaths in 2015	What a coincidence!

*Would it be better to list by total edits or distinct editors? In any case, that should spice it up a bit. You know how to copy the Quarry query right? @Serendipodous: I made a new one for top-20 in past week by distinct editors. Take your pick, I trust your judgement. EllenCT (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Possible alternative: article to which most editors contributed over the last week. Could be a totally different list (where endless debates between few people do not count for much). Erik Zachte (talk) 06:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Erik Zachte: that is a fascinating question. [1] versus [2] -- I would say that they each have their merits beyond the failure mode you describe. How would you combine the two so that both total edits and distinct editors weigh into the ranking? EllenCT (talk) 20:32, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'n not sure how to turn this into a report. Editing is not necessarily tied to anything outside of Wikipedia, so it will be very difficult to draw any conclusions from it. Serendi ^pod ous 23:59, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to help. EllenCT (talk) 18:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratz and thanks to both ed for his long work and the new team for stepping up and putting energy in! Also I look forward to seeing Ellen's new feature. 107.77.75.46 (talk) 06:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to Ed and to the new team, and special thanks to Ellen for her suggestion, which inspired me to check out the most edited Wikidata items over the past week. -- Daniel Mietchen (talk) 09:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Signpost for one of the most interesting issues of Signpost for a very long time. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 01:24, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, Kudpung. Always great to hear! Go Phightins! 03:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]