User talk:Henrik/Archive 16

Archive 10

←

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

→

Archive 20

Henrik and stats

As you may know, there is a feature on this page to allow a user to email Henrik. I did, and his reply is that he's had server issues, is currently on vacation without a computer to fix the problem, but will attend to it upon his return. --Maile66 (talk)

That's great, thank you. I thought he was inactive but it is good to know that he will try to fix it. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 23:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for doing this, and thanks Henrik for making such a great tool!!!--Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Great news, thanks! Rumiton (talk) 04:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

The catch is that the source dammit.lt in Lithuania is still down! so even if Henrik fixes his server, it's won't work. Electron9 (talk) 12:06, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Stats not updating

Hi Henrik,Article traffic statistics not updated?There doesn't seem to be any article traffic statistics since September 20 Dgolitis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.72.228 (talk) 01:55, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Henrik, I also noticed that the stats were not updating (this time on the self-categorization theory article). I see now that many people are communicating this to you so this seems a bit redundant. Anyway, it is a fantastic feature and hopefully all is well on your end. Kind Regards Andrew (talk) 02:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

PageView stats is working again!!!--Tomwsulcer (talk) 21:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hallo Henrik, what the matter that the views to articles in Wikipedia on October 7 are not countet? Kindest regards. Dgolitsis--Dgolitsis (talk) 11:22, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

The source dammit.lt in Lithuania is still down, so even if Henrik fixes his server, it won't work. Electron9 (talk) 03:35, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Can anyone fix the Lithuanian server? Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 04:07, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Seems it's only a Lithuanian DNS name. Server seems to be physically located in Germany. Electron9 (talk) 12:33, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Why can't this tool be hosted on the ToolServer?--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:17, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

It started working again. Dr.K. ^{λogosπraxis} 21:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hurraaaaayyyy!! ;-) seems dammit.lt was the answer ;) Data for oct 17 is missing thoe. Electron9 (talk) 23:14, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki stats

Hello Henrik,

I was wondering if there exists statistics on Wikipedia BY:

1) Monthly hits (or annual if not) 2) For the last 5 years (the longer the better) 3) The 50 U.S.A. states 4) Topic (I am interested in health related topics, such as diseases)

Also, in the wiki stats page, I can see the charts, but cant load the raw data page. Is this temporary?

Thanks for helping expand the barriers of human knowledge!

Angelica Meinhofer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angieaje (talk • contribs) 23:52, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

• News and notes: Arabic Wikipedia gets video intros, Smithsonian gifts images, and WikiProject Conservatism scrutinized

• In the news: Why Wikipedia survives while others haven't; Wikipedia as an emerging social model; Jimbo speaks out

• WikiProject report: History in your neighborhood: WikiProject NRHP

• Featured content: Brazil's boom-time dreams of naval power: The ed17 explains the background to a new featured topic

• Arbitration report: Case requests on ethnic strife and a WikiProject declined, Abortion case stalls but topic bans look to be lightened on amendment

• Technology report: WMDE renew investment in Toolserver, first offsite backup programme of Wikimedia begun

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

dammit.lt is down again

The data source dammit.lt is down again, and thus stats.grok.se as well Electron9 (talk) 01:52, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Invalid page view statistics

Again...95.133.58.221 (talk) 11:25, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Page view statistics broken for sister projects

Hi Henrik,

stats.grok.se is ridiculously useful and I use it frequently.

That said, there is a problem with sister projects.

If you are on Wikinews and go to the page view statistics for an article, you get taken to a page like this: [1]

Now if you change the month, it removes the "/en.n" from the URL and takes you to the page view stats for that month for the equivalent article in Wikipedia (which, for the link above, doesn't exist). Any chance of a fix? Thanks. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:24, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't work. Why ?

Sorry, but it doesn't work ! Again and again. 20 October : 0 ! Please, tell us why ? Thanks a lot.

IP, 22 October 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.219.100 (talk) 05:17, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Stats not working for 2 Days

Hi! Henrik, Thanks for your service for this View Statistics. Would you please check the following Stats? It is a page for Korean version of "Grand Canyon" that did not show any visits last two days. Thanks again. [[2]] Khlnmusa (talk) 17:04, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Bug report II

Hi there, Henrik. This already was commented to Mr.Z-man, but seems he is out for now. So, I am forwarding this issue to you, hope you can help on this:

Transcription: Performance and demand seem to be minor problems. If you compare the historic statistic of the five latest months you will see that the current month (October) shows articles completely out of that historic series. Something is very wrong. As I did before, analyzing right now the WikiProject Paranormal's pageview, you see an article of minor relevance now counting more than 14,000 views per day. This is practically impossible to that article ("Vril"). Though most seem OK, other articles as: "John Murray Spear", "Clinton Road (New Jersey)", etc, exhibit an exaggerated, and therefore absurd counting (statistically speaking). So, the issue is a little hairier. Good lucky. TriCycloped (talk) 02:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

This is an issue with the source data from Wikimedia, which is out of my control. It affects Henrik's stats too. Mr.Z-man 03:15, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

I see. Yet, you (and may be Henrik can help too) likely is/are the better person(s) to contact Wikimedia and require a revision of those figures to them. Meanwhile can be a good idea to place (to the public) a warning in such pageviews that the numbers are under revision by technical reasons. We can argue that all this it is important once involves Wikipedia's credibility. TriCycloped (talk) 12:40, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

More:

Analyses done specifically for October, day 22 (2011), and researched for the first hundreds of articles better ranked. Note that we are talking about very popular articles, therefore with expressive demand. What we have found in this day:

- Very, very rarely some article had its stats increased (day 22), such as the article Marian apparition. And, of course, the stats of Vril, which has a gigantic/impossible counting, confined to one only day, and 0 view in all other days of October.

- Most articles had stats decreased below their averages, something around 30, 40, or 50%, which is statistically absurd.

- Many articles had the counting erased (0 view) in some earlier day of October, such as "Ouija", "The Amityville Horror", "Merlin", "Tunguska event", "Nibiru collision", "Loch Ness Monster", "Jersey Devil", "Nazca Lines", "Unidentified flying object", etc. Again, absurd!

Conclusions:

- Articles are losing their number of views. They are being artificially decreased by some incorrect procedure (Bug… etc).

- Many of these figures are being transferred most to the article Vril, and some to others.

- These issues are not being fixed in the end of each month, with the all computation of final figures. The monthly stats are being closed with incorrect amounts (this comes from analysis for September). TriCycloped (talk) 14:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

As you understand it is enough to put your cursor in the address bar, press Enter key and hold it for a minute to have insane number of calls. Поверхаххапайко (talk) 08:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Visits counter

Hello, please, receive my respect for such useful thing for us [3]. Can I ask you - if I can get list of first 1000 most visited articles? --Cemenarist (talk) 11:06, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

• From the editors: A call for contributors

• Opinion essay: There is a deadline

• Interview: Contracting for the Foundation

• In the news: Are Wikipedians reluctant journalists?; Wikipedia:The Musical

• WikiProject report: Great WikiProject Logos

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Abortion; request for amendment on Climate Change case

• Technology report: WMF launches coding challenge, WMDE starts hiring for major new project

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 10:39, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Traffic Statistic Tool

Hi Henrik.

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		I hereby award you another barnstar for your traffic statistic tool, which is just amazing. Sometimes it's tempting to think "I won't do anything more to this minor article - I'm sure no-one really looks at it". And then your tool shows that it gets quite a lot of hits every day! It is hugely motivational, and a Brilliant Idea. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikibooks Page View Statistics

Hi, I'm a swiss Wikibooks author. Did you can it make possible, to include the Wikibooks projects? I like your Wikipedia statistic site. Sorry my english is very bad. Best regards --Tschoggi (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't work

Your tool doesn't work. That's a pity ! Maybe, you will give us some explanations. Best regards.

IP, 28 October 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.14.91.177 (talk) 07:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Henrik I have seen your many edits and input on the footprints poem. I also see that you live in Sweden. I would appreciate you not interfering with my authorship. I would like your address so I may file an injunction against you for ruining the historical account of my family's legacy footprints in the sand also known as footprints by Ella H Scharring-Hausen & Carolyn Joyce Carty. Referencing anything to Rachel Aviv's website is just another form of fooling the public about the true authorship which I own in it's entirety. Who do you think you are with input like this when you have no knowledge on this subject at all? If you fail to send me your address to serve an injunction on you, I will notify Jim Wales owner of Wiki and have you both cited. I cannot say what I really want to say to your face about how this makes me feel other than you disquist me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.232.89.106 (talk) 23:47, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello Henrik, what the matter that the views to articles in Wikipedia on October 23 are not countet? Kindest regards)--Dgolitsis

Henrik hasn't edited since March. —Mike Allen 09:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

OK, but please tell us why it work or it doesn't work ? What's the matter with this very uncertain tool ? Maybe, a Wikipedia administrator will give us some help... Thanks a lot.

IP, 30 October 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.219.100 (talk) 11:41, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

ZERO visit days

Hello, What's broken? ZERO visit days on multiple pages this month can't be accurate .... Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by TWCAdirector (talk • contribs) 16:15, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

• Opinion essay: The monster under the rug

• Recent research: WikiSym; predicting editor survival; drug information found lacking; RfAs and trust; Wikipedia's search engine ranking justified

• News and notes: German Wikipedia continues image filter protest

• In the news: Citizendium on the rocks, Shankbone celebrated, and the week in vandalism

• Discussion report: Proposal to return this section from hiatus is successful

• WikiProject report: 'In touch' with WikiProject Rugby union

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Abortion case stalls, request for clarification on Δ, discretionary sanctions streamlined

• Technology report: Wikipedia Zero announced; New Orleans successfully hacked

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 17:21, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Henrik is gone?

His last contribution was 23 march 2011... --Denkhenk (talk) 19:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

In article Kastoria(Καστοριά)

Dont seems statistics elementes from 25-31 October Dgolitsis — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.68.74.203 (talk) 07:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Source code available?

Hi Henrik,

I was wondering, is the source code for stats.grok.se somewhere available for download? Thanks so much for an awesome and useful tool! Drdee (talk) 17:55, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Henrik is gone

Henrik is gone. That's obvious. But that's a pity... Stats are unavailable. It doesn't work. Please, a Wikipedia administrator !

IP, 6 November 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.14.91.177 (talk) 08:21, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 November2011

• Special report: A post-mortem on the Indian Education Program pilot

• News and notes: Wikimedia Norway awarded, Halloween on the Main Page, Wikimedia UK recognised

• In the news: The Economist assays the encyclopaedia's challenges, Jimbo speaks on net future, and an inclusionist alternative emerges.

• Discussion report: Special report on the ArbCom Elections steering RfC

• WikiProject report: Booting up with WikiProject Computer Science

• Featured content: Slow week for Featured content

• Arbitration report: Δ saga returns to arbitration, while the Abortion case stalls for another week

• Technology report: Full steam ahead on Visual Editor, the avoidance of lock-breaking and 1.18b1 release

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:25, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Page View Statistics now discussed at the village pump

FYI Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Page_View_Statistics Ottawahitech (talk) 19:28, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Discussion at the pump disappeared before I had a chance to check it out carefully, sigh... Now there may be another developing here:Wikipedia:Help_desk#Broken_tool.3F Ottawahitech (talk) 13:00, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

• ...and of course the links I provided above less than two weeks ago are alreay dead. Unfortunately it appears that discussions on this encyclopedia are very short lived... Ottawahitech (talk) 16:32, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks from Cape Canaveral

I like the invaluable tool you designed for getting stats on wiki pages. Analytics is worth more that its weight in gold for us writers eh? --Ourhistory153 (talk) 18:37, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

• News and notes: ArbCom nominations open, participation grants finalized, survey results on perceptions on Wikipedia released

• In the news: Fundraising vs ads redux, WikiConference India nigh, a world lit up with articles

• WikiProject report: Having a Conference with WikiProject India

• Featured content: Writing featured content: Advice from Sturmvogel 66; Sports, sports, sports!

• Arbitration report: Abortion and Betacommand 3 in evidence phase, three case requests outstanding

• Technology report: Coding Challenge results; Wikimedians to wait and see if Athena really does represent "wisdom, courage and inspiration"

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 22:34, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Traffic Statistics - Malayalam Wikipedia

Please add Malayalam Wikipedia too, in the drop down list. --Jairodz (talk) 03:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Removal of beta service pages/notability issues

Hi Henrik

I have edited the entry on my father, Keith Lawrence who flew in the Battle of Britain in 1940. He is still alive and I see him every week. As well as knowing his date of birth and his general life history, I have access to his Pilot's Flying Logbook, giving completely accurate information about his time in RAF - but this is not a published document. This information and the Logbook are primary sources, which I have used for the Edits I have done.

I have noted several administrative points:

(a) It says "This is very much a beta service and may disappear or change at any time", presumably because of the low numbers of people viewing the page. (b) "The topic of this article may not meet the general notability guideline. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (August 2011)"

My questions are: 1) If I add secondary sources (confirmation of material relating to Keith Lawrence which is in various published books) does that reduce the liklihood of the article being merged, redirected or deleted? Or might it disappear anyway, because it is a 'beta service'? 2) If I spend time adding references and citations to secondary sources, is there a time limit for doing this, please? (For example, 6 months from the August 2011 date mentioned above?)

Basically, I would like to know, please, if it is worth me spending time providing secondary sources if the article will be deleted anyway because of the low number of 'hits' the page receives.

Thanks,

Geoffhl (talk) 22:12, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

• News and notes: Last-minute candidates for ArbCom, the Sue Gardner European Tour hits London

• In the news: Indian wikiconference heralds expansion, fundraiser in Silicon Valley major donor coup, import of Wikipedia reconsidered

• Discussion report: Much ado about censorship

• WikiProject report: Working on a term paper with WikiProject Academic Journals

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: End in sight for Abortion case, nominations in 2011 elections

• Technology report: Mumbai and Brighton hacked; horizontal lists have got class

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:54, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Table 1-1000 reading articles on Greek remains unchanged. [Dgolitsis]--Dgolitsis (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics down !

Please, some help ! Please, a Wikipedia administrator ! That's a pity. Best regards.

IP, 25 November 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.14.91.177 (talk) 10:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Great job! congratulations for such a useful tool! R--129.125.13.40 (talk) 18:44, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

Plug Wikipedia to Google Analytics

Hi there,

First of all, thanks for your tool. I got a question regarding google analytics and your tool.

Is there a way to export wikipedia data (page views) directly in google analytics. We already can measure visits from wikipedia, but I would integrate in GA visits ON wikipedia to manage directly all my data.

Do you have any solution ?

Thanks a lot. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.164.227.231 (talk) 19:38, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

• News and notes: Arb's resignation sparks lightning RfC, Fundraiser 2011 off to a strong start, GLAM in Qatar

• In the news: The closed, unfriendly world of Wikipedia, fundraiser fun and games, and chemists vs pornstars

• Recent research: Quantifying quality collaboration patterns, systemic bias, POV pushing, the impact of news events, and editors' reputation

• WikiProject report: The Signpost scoops The Bugle

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Voting underway in the elections, finally a final decision on Abortion, scant movement on requests

• Technology report: Foundation appears correct to back improved smartphone support; and how a Reddit slip meant no-one could read anything for thirty minutes

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:45, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Request for yearly page view statistics

Hi,

I wonder whether your stats tool could be made to show yearly as well as monthly stats, please? for example, as well as http://stats.grok.se/en/201111/rosetta%20stone you would make http://stats.grok.se/en/2011/rosetta%20stone viewable. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Hear hear; that is just what I was going to ask. But thanks anyway for the stats tool as it stands - brilliantly informative and encouraging for editors.45ossington (talk) 08:53, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Basil W. Spalding

To whom it may concern,

Hello. I can imagine your busy so don't feel offended if I just jump right on to the point here. First of all, believe me that what I'm about to say is the truth and I really hope you will allow me to fulfill my wish. I recently started an article titled (Basil W. Spalding). I can give you a summary of what I plan to add if you want? Anyway, I do not exaggerate when I say that I honestly think you should consider allowing me to contiune and not to delete it. Basil Spalding was a very interesting man who is connected to many famous people and places, the people and places can all be found in Wikipedia. I mean no offense to anyone, but there are articles in Wikipedia that are far less interesting and helpful. Please reconsider, you'll be glad you did.

Thanks a lot! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abdullah-b-h (talk • contribs) 16:35, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

• News and notes: Amsterdam gets the GLAM treatment, fundraising marches on, and a flourish of new admins

• In the news: A Wikistream of real time edits, a call for COI reform, and cracks in the ivory tower of knowledge

• Discussion report: Trial proposed for tool apprenticeship

• WikiProject report: This article is about WikiProject Disambiguation. For other uses...

• Featured content: This week's Signpost is for the birds!

• Arbitration report: Elections due to finish this week, little activity on Betacommand 3, Abortion case amended

• Technology report: Incremental dumps help mirrors, full screen search helps mobile visitors, and two MediaWiki releases help external sites

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 18:40, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 December 2011

• Opinion essay: Wikipedia in Academe – and vice versa

• News and notes: Research project banner ads run afoul of community

• In the news: Bell Pottinger investigation, Gardner on gender gap, and another plagiarist caught red-handed

• WikiProject report: Spanning Nine Time Zones with WikiProject Russia

• Featured content: Wehwalt gives his fifty cents; spies, ambushes, sieges, and Entombment

• Arbitration report: Betacommand 3 workshop revived, two cases set for acceptance and the ArbCom elections finish on a whimper

• Technology report: Trials and tribulations of image rotation, Article Feedback version 5, and new diff colours

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 17:51, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

vandalism

I need help in connection with the article about Peter Monamy, marine painter.

This article was vandalised 3 times on 8th December.

How may this be reported and corrected?

Seemannpaa (talk) 16:53, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism
• Template: Talk Page Vandalism Warnings

-Maile66 (talk) 17:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Any Chance to use the Statistics tool on a private wiki?

I love the statistics page you developed and would find it a welcome add on to the Wiki that I run for my company. Is there any way I can do that? Great Job! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimerb (talk • contribs) 01:51, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

MediaWiki comes with a tool that keeps tracks of stats data. Henrik just designed a tool that aggregates it in a better format. If you're good with programming things you could probably do something similar, or hire someone (or there's a small chance Henrik might do it). In any case the related info is at mw:Manual:Hitcounter table. Killiondude (talk) 05:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Right. And unless you have a huge site (like Wikipedia), the built in counter will probably work well. henrik•talk 22:48, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

One comp/day or one visit/day?

Hi! Would you ansver my following question please? Does Statistics show all the visits except for those from the comp I look up the statistics or any visit whatsoever? And whether statistics give one visit a day from the same comp or every single visit? Slovolyub (talk) 20:52, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Answered in the FAQ: any visit from any computer at any time. Killiondude (talk) 05:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Are any types of page views filtered? Sorry, but I didn't see this in your FAQ. Ncmore (talk) 22:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Huh. I could have sworn that I had a listing for this type of question. I guess I was wrong. The only "filtering" I can think of is that the hits are based on URL so if one were to click on a link that redirects to another title, the redirect itself gets the hit, not the target. But any time your browser requests the page contents again, that counts as a hit (depending on browser and settings, if you were to hit refresh to get the newest version of the page, not your browser's cached version, you would be logging another "hit" for that URL). Hopefully that makes sense. It's how I understand it, in any case. Killiondude (talk) 22:43, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, it's not filtered, but I asked someone at the foundation if, for example, things like search engine bots are filtered. I'll let you know if I get a reply :) henrik•talk 22:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

stats.grok.se

Henrik,

First off thanks for a great tool. My only problem: for my thesis, I need pageview statistics

(*) of 100 company pages (microsoft, apple, etc.) (*) per minute (*) over the february to august timeframe

Does your tool support this or do I need to download all raw log files and extract them myself?

I'm hoping to hear from you soon, Kind regards, Dennis (dennis@puntegale.nl) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.101.213.187 (talk) 15:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're asking for. The only reason I can see why you'd want to extract the raw data is to get a per-hour rate rather than a daily rate, but there are no "per minute" statistics. You can average more precisely with the per hour information, I guess.

Here are some pro-tips:

1. Hit stats from redirects aren't included in the target page's hit count. So people who visit any of these links end up viewing Apple Inc. but their hits are attributed to whatever URL they use to get there. If you want a really accurate figure, you might want to consider creating lists of redirects from your target company pages. Hope that makes sense.
2. You can get JSON formatted data by prepending /json/ before the language in the URL. That is, [4] Depending on how you're harvesting the info, that might be more useful.

Killiondude (talk) 06:04, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Hello,Henrik. Thanks for a good tool. Please tell us about copyrighted data of Wikipedia article traffic statistics.--111.64.186.224 (talk) 11:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 December 2011

• News and notes: Anti-piracy act has Wikimedians on the defensive, WMF annual report released, and Indic language dynamics

• In the news: To save the wiki: strike first, then makeover?

• Discussion report: Polls, templates, and other December discussions

• WikiProject report: A dalliance with the dismal scientists of WikiProject Economics

• Featured content: Panoramas with Farwestern and a good week for featured content

• Arbitration report: The community elects eight arbitrators

• Technology report: Visual editor demo launched, hailed as "most important change to our user experience ... ever"; but elsewhere over-hasty deployments criticised

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:59, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics down?

Hi Henrik,

is the statistics-tool down? No new calculations since November 22. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genderforschung (talk • contribs) 08:19, 25 November 2011 (UTC)

tx --Genderforschung (talk) 13:45, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Notice: No data for late december 2011

Data is missing for 2011-12-23 and -24. Hopefully it will be fixed. Alternatives? Electron9 (talk) 07:50, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

It's Wikimedia who isn't publishing the raw data; see the size listings for the files dated the 23rd and 24th here. Killiondude (talk) 08:09, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Seems to have failed 23 dec 02:00. Alternative sources? Electron9 (talk) 17:14, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Zählung an Weihnachten

Hallo Henrik, ich komme schon mal wieder als “Meckerer”, das heißt, ich habe den Eindruck, dass am 23. und 24. Dezember 2011 nicht korrekt gezählt wurde; denn dass der VW Käfer beispielsweise am Heiligen Abend keine Zugriffe hatte, kann ich mir nicht vorstellen. Kannst Du Dich bitte um das Problem kümmern? Herzliche Grüße und frohe Weihnachten -- Spurzem (talk) 21:49, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

No data for 23,24,25 December

No data for 23,24, 25 December. Again without any explanation. Henrik is... out of order. Please, a Wikipedia administrator. Best regards.

IP, 26 December 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.219.100 (talk) 06:12, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Second that, came here to report that also. This is highly unlikely and I've seen it for other pages as well. (Folding@home's views are one but there are others) Looks like there is some recording going on, but it's missing the majority of the views. Good luck and thanks for the tool, Jessemv (talk) 06:22, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Wikipedia article traffic statistics of Abdul Qavi Desnavi not showing last 3 days — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpldxb (talk • contribs) 06:34, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Hello, I am from Odia (Oriya) Wikipedia. Odia is not included yet. How to add Odia ?? Thanks in advance :) -- ɑηsuмaη ^{ʈ ᶏ ɭ Ϟ} 05:10, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Out of order

Wikipedia article traffic statistics out of order ? Yes, I think so about the end of this month. But please, give us some explanations about the problem. Thanks and best wishes for the New Year !

IP, 27 December 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.88.219.100 (talk) 07:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

First thank you, I love this. My problem is that I want more. So if I can make one request it would be a new tool which would allow you to look at the statistics over a longer time frame say life of article, in a bar graph. This information would say a lot to everyone. Thank's Andy2159 (talk) 10:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

The life of an article would be hard to determine. That is, people visit redlinks when there are no articles there, sometimes articles are deleted then recreated, etc. One thing that Henrik has done, however, is to allow for users to look at the chart at a year-long interval. Just manually change the URL on stats.grok to [5] for example. Killiondude (talk) 06:09, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip - I was looking for all time stats but this enough for my needs. Any chance of getting a mention of this on the tool page? A line saying it can be done by deleting month in the address line and then reloading page the would be enough (of course a nice dropdown thingy would be better...).--Nedergard (talk) 08:22, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 December 2011

• Opinion essay: Openness versus quality: why we're doing it wrong, and how to fix it

• Recent research: Psychiatrists: Wikipedia better than Britannica; spell-checking Wikipedia; Wikipedians smart but fun; structured biological data

• News and notes: Fundraiser passes 2010 watermark, brief news

• WikiProject report: The Tree of Life

• Featured content: Going through the roster with Killervogel5 and a plethora of featured content

• Arbitration report: Three open cases, one set for acceptance, arbitrators formally appointed by Jimmy Wales

• Technology report: Wikimedia in Go Daddy boycott, and why you should 'Join the Swarm'

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Is Wikipedia article traffic statistics accurate. Is it based on how many different people looked at the articles or how many time it was viewed total like if I looked at my List of plasma (physics) articles that I created and clicked it 100 times to view it does the 100 count or is it just 1 counted on to the Wikipedia article traffic statistics. Is there a way to make it more notable besides adding it to see also.Shawn Worthington Laser Plasma (talk) 08:23, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

AFAIK, every page load counts irrespective if it's the same IP-address doing this. Electron9 (talk) 17:16, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

How about duplicating another tab section does that add to the statistics sheet?Shawn Worthington Laser Plasma (talk) 01:41, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

Why is there 0 number gaps on some days like holidays for the statistics is it added still in the long run.Shawn Worthington Laser Plasma (talk) 23:10, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

• Interview: The Gardner interview

• News and notes: Things bubbling along as Wikimedians enjoy their holidays

• WikiProject report: Where are they now? Part III

• Featured content: Ghosts of featured content past, present, and future

• Arbitration report: New case accepted, four open cases, terms begin for new arbitrators

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 15:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

List of airlines of India

Thanks for protecting this page. Cheers AKS (talk) 18:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Top page views last month

A tip!

• http://toolserver.org/~johang/wikitop/english.html

Electron9 (talk) 14:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

What happened between December 23 and 25?

Hi,
As you may see for example here and here, from some reason, for December 23 till 25 we do not have any page views statistics on the Hebrew Wikipedia. Is there any way to restore these details? Actually, were the page views statistics for these days even documented in any way? Thanks in advance, Ldorfman (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think so. It was something screwed up by Wikimedia. See here. Killiondude (talk) 00:34, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Is there anything new about it? any way to recover this data? Ldorfman (talk) 00:42, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I took Jarry's "cost us 3.5 days' worth of statistics" statement to mean that the data is irrecoverable. Killiondude (talk) 00:45, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Too bad, but we'll manage... Thanks. Ldorfman (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, these kinds of gaps are unfortunate, but when the data was lost at the source I can't do anything about it. :( Sorry. henrik•talk 07:39, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Due to your good work, these "articles-rating" are actually part of every Wikipedia now, as there's a link to it from every single page. Many times it's a valuable source. Don't you think it may be a good idea to move it to the Foundation's servers? If it becomes their "headache" it may prevent such incidents... What do you think? Ldorfman (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

They're the ones that already publish the stats, Henrik just provides a tool that aggregates the info and puts it in an easy to read module. :) I thought I heard plans a while back that Wikimedia would write their own hit statistics tool, but I am not sure what happened... Henrik might know more. Killiondude (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

But are "they" the ones handling this tool's servers nowadays? Ldorfman (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Katia Tiutiunnik

User:Playmobilonhishorse continues to vandalize the article Katia Tiutiunnik, which has been up for over three years and which has never attracted any negative feedback. On the contrary, every piece of information contained therein is backed up by multiple, credible references. Could someone advise and/or assist us? User:LivingMuse

To begin with, User:Playmobilonhishorse isn't vandalizing the article. He's expressing a concern that it was largely written by someone with a close connection to Katia Tiutiunnik, which doesn't seem like an unreasonable concern. If I may ask, what is your relation to Katia? henrik•talk 11:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm just a humble musicologist who happens to admire the work of Katia Tiutiunnik--like a number of other researchers in my field. I've never even met her...There are many more contributors to Katia Tiutiunnik besides myself and the article has been up for over three years. Furthermore, it has an impressive number of credible references--many more than numerous other Wikipedia articles. Hence, I do believe that the postings of User:Playmobilonhishorse constitute vandalism.LivingMuse (talk) 11:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism is the deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of an article. A good faith effort, even if misguided, is never vandalism. henrik•talk 12:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

If no one else has criticized the content of article since it was first created, over three years ago, I have my doubts that the statements of User:Playmobilonhishorse were made in "good faith". We may just have to agree to disagree.LivingMuse (talk) 14:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

The definition of what constitutes vandalism isn't a matter of opinion. He may be misguided, but you're definitely in the wrong in reverting him and accusing him of vandalism. A better approach would have been to communicate; ask him what his concerns were. henrik•talk 15:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback.I myself acted in good faith.LivingMuse (talk) 21:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Dear Henrik, I very much appreciate the article traffic statistics service. May I suggest to enable the possibility to make a distinction between two groups of visitors: "normals" vs. "logged ins". My reasoning is the following: Wikipedia is very much directed to the public in general. I would be interested to know how many visits to a special article we are working on are made by current people, not by those possibly working on it. (User Bleckneuhaus in german wikipedia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.102.20.212 (talk) 11:23, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Afraid not, the data is completely anonymous. One could, in theory, add page counters for logged in users with a site wide javascript and subtract that number of visits from the data, but you'd need to gain acceptance for it (there are pretty big privacy implications) 17:40, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Article on Keith Lawrence

Hi Henrik

I see that "This article has multiple issues". Also, it has been "Tagged" since August 2011, although I can't find an explanation of what tagging involves.

I have now added References to a number of books as secondary sources, and also added a number of External Links, including a BBC video of the subject of the article. I wonder if you consider that some of these "multiple issues" have now been satisfactorily dealt with?

Regards,

Geoffhl (talk) 23:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012

• Technological roadmap: 2011's technological achievements in review, and what 2012 may hold

• News and notes: Fundraiser 2011 ends with a bang

• In the news: Wikipedia ends annual fundraising drive; Monmouthpedia launches

• WikiProject report: From Traditional to Experimental: WikiProject Jazz

• Featured content: Contentious FAC debate: a week in review

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Betacommand 3

• Technology report: December in more detail; and why the MediaWiki codebase was "slushed" this week

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 04:14, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

don't agree at all

should be an early summary of what caused the sinking up early.

so don't agree with your assessment - at all — Preceding unsigned comment added by Le.Turlupin (talk • contribs) 10:11, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

flattr: request of change of the wrong link ( http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/piazza_telematica ) with the correct one ( http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/Piazza_Telematica )

Dear Henrik,

I want just to tag that when I consult statistics at the link - http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/piazza_telematica - the flattr system brings me to the "Piazza telematica" article which was deleted on October 2006 as you can see at this page : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piazza_telematica .

The correct and current revision of this old article started in 2006 is now at the link - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piazza_Telematica - with the word "Telematica" in capital letter.

Is it possible on the "flattr system" to change the link from the wrong one ( http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/piazza_telematica ) to the correct one ( http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/Piazza_Telematica ) ?

Thank you so much for your precious help and assistance.

Kind regards .

--Bitwatt (talk) 05:30, 11 January 2012 (UTC) http://www.bitwatt.com

Userfy request

Hi Henrik,

I need to recuperate a deleted page, so that I may rewrite it to meet wikipedia standards. I am still trying to understand why it was deleted, and the page in question is re-new - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re-new

I have in the meantime made a short version, but I'd be happy for any pointers that could help me finish this task.

Thanks, Lars Graugaard re-new — Preceding unsigned comment added by LarsGraugaard (talk • contribs) 15:17, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikiversity:Metrics

Henrik, Thanks for the Wikiversity Metrics work at: http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Metrics Is this up-to-date? When I request recent statistics for the Wikiversity Main page it shows only a very few hits. See, for example: http://stats.grok.se/en/201112/Wikiversity%3AMain_Page

Thanks --Lbeaumont (talk) 12:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Henrik, My primary need is to see Wikiversity usage statistics for a particular page. If your tool at: http://stats.grok.se/ could include another pull down selector to choose the Wikimedia project (e.g. Wikiversity) that would be spectacular! Thanks --Lbeaumont (talk) 13:19, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

It does support wikiversity sites as well, and yes, it's up to date if you go to this URL: http://stats.grok.se/en.v/201112/Wikiversity%3AMain_Page (note the '.v'). But adding a dropdown for the other projects would be good. henrik•talk 10:46, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Excellent and thanks for your help with this. I am still unable to get statistics for the page http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Dignity I have used the URL: http://stats.grok.se/en.v/201112/Wikiversity%3ADignity which seems correct from analogy with your example, however: 1) it shows zero page views (this seems wrong because I have viewed it several times) and the link in the graph title does not open the expected page. What am I doing wrong here? Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 16:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

You're almost there :) You should go to http://stats.grok.se/en.v/201112/Dignity this url. Basically, if you're at http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/<page>, to see the stats you should go to http://stats.grok.se/en.v/201112/<page>. henrik•talk 17:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes that works! Thank you, Thank you, Thank you! --Lbeaumont (talk) 21:14, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

is this how I ask a question?

Hey Henrik:

For complicated reasons, I would like total hit counts on all the wikipedia articles during 2011. I can obviously do this by scraping your data and aggregating, but it's about 1TB of stuff and I would just as soon be a better net citizen. Is it easy for you to put this together for me? If not, I'll scrape what's there.

Thanks!

Matt Ginsberg Mattginsberg1 (talk) 07:26, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Just to make sure I understand: you'd like a single number, the total number of pages viewed in 2011? henrik•talk 10:43, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

I'd like a total number for each page. So there are 3.8 million English pages, give or take, and I'd like to know how many times each page was access during 2011. I started dumping all the individual data the better part of a week ago, and I'm up to March now.  :)

Does that make sense? Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattginsberg1 (talk • contribs) 17:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

• Special report: English Wikipedia to go dark on January 18

• Sister projects: What are our sisters up to now?

• News and notes: WMF on the looming SOPA blackout, Wikipedia turns 11, and Commons passes 12 million files

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Beer

• Featured content: Lecen on systemic bias in featured content

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, Betacommand case deadlocked, Muhammad images close near

• Technology report: ArticleFeedback moves into new trial phase; and how MediaWiki integrates with Facebook, IPv6, and PostgreSQL explored

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Dates now embedded in data for stats.grok.se

I have noticed the stats data has changed, internally, to include dates within the list of pageview counts:

{"daily_views": {"2012-01-01": 1018, "2012-01-02": 1311, "2012-01-03": 1228, "2012-01-04": 1234, "2012-01-05": 1273, "2012-01-06": 1366, "2012-01-07": 1113, "2012-01-08": 1390, "2012-01-09": 1455, "2012-01-10": 1457, "2012-01-15": 1613, "2012-01-14": 1538, "2012-01-11": 1438, "2012-01-13": 1462, "2012-01-16": 1534, "2012-01-12": 1577}, "month": "201201", "rank": -1, "title": "Aardvark"}

Formerly, the list contained only the count numbers in sequential order, without any dates between the numbers. Now the entries appear to be scrambled, with the dates mixed rather than in chronological order. -Wikid77 (talk) 14:34, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Previously it was somewhat ambiguous which data belonged to which dates - this is more clear imho (for example, you had to know when the json-latest-url was fetched in order to make sense of the data). I guess I could sort it though, but ordering usually isn't strictly defined in associative arrays, and it might be better to do it in the user code.

If you want to access the old data, stats-classic.grok.se still has the old API, but I'm not promising to run it indefinitely.

I find the classic display to be far, far more legible and useful than the new one; however, the addition of the 30/60/90 day tool is a great improvement. The difficulties I have with legibility are: (1) the grey shadows behind the grey bars which muddy the chart, whereas the prior flat but colored bars were crisp and easy to read. (2) Concerning how dates are shown, the current date format is much too long for width of the bars, making the chart more difficult to read, whereas in the prior version each bar was clearly labeled. I believe the new date format is unnecessary, since even in the 90-day display it will be clear to the visitor which series of day-identifiers belongs to which month. While the old version is still available it would be sad for that to go away as you said it may. My request is that instead the old format be updated with the 30/60/90 tool and the new tools that are at the bottom of the new page. Finally, thank you very much for your efforts on this valuable service, which I have used daily for a number of articles for a few years. Coastwise (talk) 00:44, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Just want to say that I completely agree with this. Jessemv (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

This is part of a complete rewrite of the frontend. It might have been a good idea to give some kind of warning that I intended to change the json format though, I promise to give advance notice the next time :) henrik•talk 15:05, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for stats-classic.grok.se - I see "http://stats-classic.grok.se/en/201105/Aardvark" will provide the prior quick graph of pageviews while the other is being updated. -Wikid77 23:16, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Database dump of stats.grok.se

Hello Henrik!

It's good to see you back. The data that stats.grok.se provides is very valuable to the Wikipedia community, but the fact that the entire dataset isn't easily accessible is a major hindrance to researchers. The raw dataset exists in several places, but processing that to a state where it could be expressively queried would be non-trivial.

I recall you mentioning that the stats.grok.se database is on the order of hundreds of gigabytes in size. What is the likelihood that you'd be willing and able to export a dump of that database? If storage space is a concern, given the high value of the dataset I imagine the Wikimedia Foundation might well be willing to host the resulting files. Would there be other technical obstacles to exporting the database -- like limits enforced by your hosting provider on processing or networked data transfer?

Best,
Emw (talk) 20:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

P.S.: Having developed a tool that builds on top of your service at stats.grok.se, I appreciate the revised JSON API (even though I'll have to update my code!).

Hi Emw! Sorry about changing the json format from under your feet without advance notice, you can use stats-classic.grok.se if you want to get it up and running temporarily.

The database is about 2.5 TB at the moment, and my hosting provider has a limit of 400GB per month (it's hosted at a remote location in a different city, so I can't easily go there with a usb drive either). I also don't have enough space for a dump file.. so there are a number of practical problems in exporting it. WMF is setting up a backup service however, I'm working with them on it. We'll see what we can figure out. henrik•talk 21:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Could the database be exported piecewise, then compressed, then transferred? Doing some back-of-the-napkin calculations, I figured the entire raw dataset of gzipped hourly files would be about 2.10 TB ((60 MB average gzipped pageview log file size/hour) * (24 hours/day) * (365 days/year) * 4 years)). Presumably your service aggregates that hourly data into daily data each night, so I imagined the compressed daily dataset would be about 20x smaller than the compressed hourly dataset -- i.e. about 100 GB. Do you have any impression on how feasible an approach like that would be for the stats.grok.se hosting?

During my spare time in the last week I've been developing a program that downloads the raw hourly pageview data files and aggregates them into daily pageview files. If I'm able to get this process efficient enough, I was thinking about distributing the job across a few dozen Amazon EC2 instances (inbound data transfer is free), writing the compressed, aggregated data to Amazon EBS, then downloading the ~ 100-200 GB dataset and making it publicly available. Maybe that would be an alternative plan if the WMF backup effort doesn't pan out for whatever reason. But, of course, it's useless if such a dataset is already publicly available.

Given that, is there any way you could update me if the plan with WMF goes into full swing? Do you have any impression on how long you'll be around for this year? Thanks, Emw (talk) 22:01, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Numbers on the tops of the graphs

Hi there Henrik! I noticed that the page view stats have a new display. Kind of surprised me! I was just wondering why the values on the tops of the bars are now hidden unless you hover over a particular bar. Before, it was very easy to determine the number of views a page had, and now there's an extra step. I was enjoying opening up the page and rapidly getting that information. I do like the new graphs though, they look more professional. Jessemv (talk) 01:47, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I second Jessemv's opinion. While the new display is more visually appealing, some of us prefer to see the hard numbers for each day. The 30/60/90 day feature is very nice, could you expand it to include x days? Great to see you back!Smallman12q (talk) 03:10, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I have to agree with Jessemv's point. One other request — could you move the links to the latest 30/60/90 days a little higher than it is now? Right now, if the most recent day has by far the highest readership in the graph, the number of hits is obscured by the "latest" links. Look at http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Italian_Wikipedia over the next few days for an example. Nyttend (talk) 04:57, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

• Nice new look. Thanks! --LA2 (talk) 04:58, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback all, much appreciated. Good point about always visibly displaying counts for each day - I'll try to reinstate the old behavior. I can't reproduce the latest links being obscured though, which browser are you using Nyttend?

The reason for it being limited to 90 days is mainly for performance reasons, I'd like to be able to show an entire year at once. henrik•talk 08:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Pageviews statistics

Dear Henrik, PLEASE restore the previous graphical representation of visitor statistics!!!! This new version is much less informative than the old one. --Elkagye (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You can access the old one at http://stats-classic.grok.se, if you wish. I do think the new one is an improvement, but I'm open to constructive feedback. henrik•talk 20:34, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I can use it. It gives much better information on visitings, which is important for instance following a significant change of an article. Thanks for your cooperation. --Elkagye (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

It would be useful to link to the same page in the old tool, and hide that link when the plot loaded. That way people with Javascript disabled can get to the graphs. --Tgr (talk) 20:54, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

stats.grok.se/en/top

Hi Henrik, will this list be updated to December 2011 instead of 2010? Thanks.--В и к и T 22:29, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the great tool and improvements. Appreciate if you can support Top article data for the last 30, 60,90 days.--Arjunaraoc 01:40, 20 January 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arjunaraoc (talk • contribs)

Fixing the top list is next on my todo-list. henrik•talk 06:56, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your statistics tool!

Thanks for your statistics tool! Would it be possible to add the number on top of each bar, like it was in the old tool? I like the new tool, but it is a bit cumbersome to point mouse on each bar to get the actual number. I realy appreciate 30/60/90 feature. Innab (talk) 23:57, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Great job, Henrik

I love the new look. Job well done, Henrik! Maile66 (talk) 12:52, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you! henrik•talk 12:58, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

JSONP

Is there a way to get the results in JSONP format? Or with CORS headers, or some other workaround for cross-domain AJAX limitations? --Tgr (talk) 21:43, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Afraid not yet, though I'll put it on my to do list. henrik•talk 21:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

An oddity

Hi Henrik. Please have a look at the stats page for Carl W. A. Groos House (New Braunfels, Texas). It doesn't have any stats at all on the graph - ever - and it sure used to. Wonder what happened. Maile66 (talk) 02:04, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hm, I see stats for that page. Not a whole lot, but a few views most days? Which exact URL are you accessing? henrik•talk 21:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I still see nothing. I've been gradually going over the pages I've created, and this one, so far, is the only one that doesn't show any statistics. For the article I access Here, and for the stats, I access Here. Very odd. Maile66 (talk) 22:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Hm, how did you get that URL for the stats page? It has encoded the parentheses incorrectly, and has some junk at the end. Try this address http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Carl_W._A._Groos_House_(New_Braunfels,_Texas) . henrik•talk 22:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

The one you provided still shows no stats on my computer. I'm using Windows XP and Firefox, if that helps. If I click on the link you provided, here is what it really pulls up http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Carl_W._A._Groos_House_%20New_Braunfels,_Texas%20#7195475257117091628 As to how I got to the other one, I brought up the article in the Search box. And then went to Page/History/Page View Statistics. This is the server

"served by mw33 in 0.286 secs" Maile66 (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, Henrik, I can get to this http://stats.grok.se/en/201201/Carl%20W.%20A.%20Groos%20House%20%28New%20Braunfels,%20Texas%29, which shows stats, if I jump through some hoops. If I take an old DYK notice link, click on that, and then change the article to the Groos house and the current month. Maile66 (talk) 22:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

More. As I keep attempting to get it to pull up correctly, the top of my browser has this message "NoScript filtered a potential cross-site scripting (XSS) attempt from [Chrome:]" I don't use Chrome. Is that you, Henrik? The details in the Console read "Sanitized suspicious request from chrome//browser/content/browser/browser x.u.l And then it goes on to say that those numbers at the end are the sanitized url as NoScript converted it from the original. And, yet, it only happens to this one article.Maile66 (talk) 01:16, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Here's another error message: [NoScript XSS] Sanitized suspicious request referer. URL (REF: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carl_W._A._Groos_House_(New_Braunfels%2C_Texas)&action=history) requested from [6]. Sanitized Referrer: [7].

I think you have a browser addon which is acing incorrectly/over zealously, probably NoScript. It seems other people are having problems with it as well on Wikipedia: http://forums.mozillazine.org/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=542057&start=225. I would try disabling it for WP if possible, or disabling it all together otherwise. henrik•talk 08:19, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Got it. NoScript has an option to "sanitize cross-site requests". I unchecked that, and it resolved the issue. Thanks for your attention, Henrik. And keep up your great work for us. Maile66 (talk) 14:08, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

Hello Henrik, thank you for your new "latest 30 60 90 days". This is very pretty clearly. Many greetings Sunday --Hedwig Storch (talk) 12:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Сan you make that?

--Андрей Перцев 1967 (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

There should be a background on the popup, which browser are you using where it doesn't show up correctly? henrik•talk 21:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Why disallow viable alternative points of view?

Some articles in Wiki are plainly biased. Yet when a user goes in to make reasonable edits to reduce the bias or reflect a referenced, verifiable, and peer-reviewed point of view the edit gets removed. Why continue in the bias as opposed to researching the edit to include the cites and see that it is a viable piece of information to include for balance? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebs27 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

We include viewpoints in proportion to their acceptance among relevant experts in the field. Young earth creationism has an extremely limited acceptance among relevant experts in the field of biology and palaeontology, so our biology and palaeontology articles do not, and should not, reflect that view. Those views are however represented in other articles. henrik•talk 21:27, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Then I should be able to edit the article simply to reflect the viewpoint that this was no transitional form but rather a bird? That has no "young earth" implications and is another commonly accepted and rational viewpoint. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebs27 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

If calling Archaeopteryx a bird reflects the mainstream view among experts, then yes. However, I suspect it does not. Given that it is already a featured article and has reached a high level of maturity, I would suggest you discuss your changes on the talk page beforehand. henrik•talk 21:40, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Your response implies that there can be only one viewpoint. Even though a number of experts disagree that this is a transitional form and those disagreements have been published, the only accepted viewpoint on Wikipedia is one which supports evolution. Thus the reason for CreationWiki and Wikipedia references being suspect. It is truly not a neutral point of view forum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebs27 (talk • contribs) 21:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

As I've said earlier, we include viewpoints in proportion to their acceptance among relevant experts in the field. henrik•talk 21:58, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Re-new

Hi Henrik,

Thanks a lot for this! However, the page I want to access for editing is the earlier one, that is, the one that existed *before* the one you have made available to me. It was created earlier the same day, as far as I recall…

Thanks, Lars — Preceding unsigned comment added by LarsGraugaard (talk • contribs) 15:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Geolocalisation of visits

Hi,

I really like your graphical application which shows the number of visits for each page on wikipedia. Do you think it would be possible to do the same kind of graphics by country or by region ? I'd be curious to know where do the readers come from and to look at some spike in the data specific to some country or to some region.

Cheers, --PAC2 (talk) 16:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) I second that. That seems like a REALLY cool idea! Hopefully it's not too difficult to implement. Jessemv (talk) 16:20, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

This isn't possible to do with the data Henrik's tool uses. The only available information from the underlying data is project name, page name, number of hits, and the size of the page requested (see here). Emw (talk) 23:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

• News and notes: SOPA blackout, Orange partnership

• In the news: World watched as Wikipedia shut down for SOPA blackout

• WikiProject report: The Golden Horseshoe: WikiProject Toronto

• Featured content: Interview with Muhammad Mahdi Karim and the best of the week

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, proposed decision in Muhammad images, AUSC call for applications

• Technology report: Looking ahead to MediaWiki 1.19 and related issues

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 18:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Redirects and page statistics

Hi Henrik, I have a quick question about how redirects get counted for page views. The 'about' page says that redirects will "split the statistics across two different statistics pages" - does that mean 1 view gets counted twice (once for the initial page, and then again to the main article), or that it only counts for the redirected page? Thanks! Sclemm (talk) 20:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

• News and notes: Update on Global Development, Wikipedia Day NYC is a success, JFK audio on Commons

• In the news: Zambian wiki-assassins, Foundation über alles, editor engagement and the innovation plateau

• Recent research: Language analyses examine power structure and political slant; Wikipedia compared to commercial databases

• WikiProject report: Digging Up WikiProject Palaeontology

• Featured content: Featured content soaring this week

• Arbitration report: Five open cases, voting on proposed decisions in two cases

• Technology report: Why "Lua" is on everybody's lips, and when to expect MediaWiki 1.19

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Upload wizard

Hi, just wanted to let you know that my upload script is now overhauled and should be generally in basic working state now. Want to have another look? I haven't yet made progress on your suggestion about different formatting of the warning messages, but the handling of article and filename problems has been improved, I think. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:18, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Update: on advice from User:AlexSm, I have moved the script page to MediaWiki:UploadScriptDemo.js, so it can be tested even without changing one's personal .js. The new method of testing is now:

• Either access the wizard page through the following "withJS" link: Reload with script
• or change the reference in your personal .js to importScript('MediaWiki:UploadScriptDemo.js');

Sorry for the inconvenience as you already edited your .js with the old value. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Copy of deleted page

I got your name from the page of editors willing to email deleted articles. If possible I would like a copy of the article on White Pine Software, deleted in 2008. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Pine_Software I realize this may not be possible and thank you for any help. You can email it to tkmitchell@mac.com if possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.252.90.55 (talk) 16:42, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

• News and notes: The Foundation visits Tunisia, analyzes donors

• In the news: Leading scholar hails Wikipedia, historians urged to contribute while PR pros remain shunned

• Discussion report: Discussion swarms around Templates for deletion and returning editors of colourful pasts

• WikiProject report: The Eye of the Storm: WikiProject Tropical Cyclones

• Featured content: Talking architecture with MrPanyGoff

• Arbitration report: Four open cases, final decision in Muhammad images, Betacommand 3 near closure

• Technology report: October's coding challenge: results now in; progress on 1.19 steady; and why for a while interwiki links were no more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:40, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Article traffic statistics defaults to 201012 ?

Hi Henrik,

Thanks for the great tool !!!

Only problem I have with it is when I'm entering date 201201 in search box I'm getting results for 201012. Is it a problem with my browser? I'm using Firefox on Win7.

Best regards,

--V4711 (talk) 01:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Henrik,

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 01:15, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Prosfiction

Hi Henrik, You indicated the deletion of prosfiction, could you explain me why. This is a high complex method currently to research the after next technology in several militaries. What takes you to the consideration that this article is not wikipedia worthy?

Best,

Daniel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foltigo (talk • contribs) 21:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi Daniel,

Wikipedia is not the place for new concepts, our goal is to lag behind the times and only write about what independent, reliable sources have already covered. I searched google scholar for mentions, as well as regular google and found very little to indicate that prosfiction is an established concept. If you'd like to improve the article to meet our inclusion criteria, I would encourage adding references to independent, reliable sources covering it.

Cheers, henrik•talk 21:51, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

Hacker Time

So you believe the arguments in favor of the article being kept (citing WP:IAR) are stronger than the arguments in favor of deleting the article (citing the failing of WP:GNG)? Eagles 24/7 (C) 18:21, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

To a certain extent, you could say that. GNG is a good guideline, and in the vast majority of cases sensible. But this place has never been about strictly adhering to rules no matter what; in the end after weighing up the arguments that advocated keeping the article versus the weight of the arguments that advocated deleting it that I was persuaded that not deleting it resulted in a better encyclopedia. It helps that the BBC is perhaps the most respected media organization in the world, so I felt that the independence clause of the GNG carried a bit less weight than it usually does. henrik•talk 19:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:08, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

• Special report: Fundraising proposals spark a furore among the chapters

• News and notes: Foundation launches Legal and Community Advocacy department

• In the news: Scholars and spindoctors contend with the emergent wikiorder

• In focus: Skirmishes in the 'great sectarian war of the Internet'

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Stub Sorting

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Betacommand 3 closed, proposed decision in Civility enforcement, AUSC candidates announced

• Technology report: January sees prototype new geodata API; but February looks to be a testing time for top developers

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 03:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Glasscubes AfD

I noticed that you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glasscubes with delete result. I'm actually quite surprised with this outcome, as I see neither consensus nor reason to discard my comment, and you provided no explanation in the closing note. Can you please explain me this closure here? — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Hm, I went back and took a second look. It seemed like a marginal case; the list of sourcing was not impressive, and the AfD discussion didn't bring up all that much. Or so I thought; I overlooked the press clippings link you posted. If you're willing to help out a bit to add more referencing to the article, I'll reverse my close.. henrik•talk 20:35, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't care this article (that's it: at all), I was just puzzled with the fact that discussion was closed. I could add the sources to the article, but I'm not interested in bringing it to the Wikipedia's quality level. Thus, if you think that adding sources to the article (and tagging it if needed: I don't remember the text) is enough, I'll add them; if not, just leave it as is. In any case I won't go beyond your talk page regarding this AfD. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I do make mistakes, so please continue to point out if you think I've screwed up somewhere :) If you're not particularly interested in the article, I'll just leave a note on the AfD page that I'd be happy for anyone to restore it. As the article text stands today, it does need some work, so I'm not keen to restore until we have someone interested in improving it. henrik•talk 21:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Resolved

 – I am satisfied with this solution. Thanks for collaboration and good luck! — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Assistant teacher programme of the Educational Exchange Service

Hello. You closed the afd for this article stating the consensus was "keep". As of right now, I am counting 5 deletes and 2 keeps. Just wondered if you could please state your rational or if this was a mistake. Thanks. SaveATreeEatAVegan 13:07, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Certainly, I found the deletion arguments mainly argued the specific German program failed GNG, and the keep arguments argued that the concept of a Foreign Language Assistant was notable. My reading of consensus was to delete the German program but keep the wider concept, which I implemented by moving the article and editing it to not be specific to that specific program. Numerically, the delete votes were more, but by strength of argument I found both the keeps and deletes roughly equal (or more accurately, they argued different things) . henrik•talk 14:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Aha, that does make sense. I appreciate the feedback. SaveATreeEatAVegan 07:32, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Weird labels

See this. There shouldn't be a decimal labels on the Y axis. I think instead there should be just integers. Jessemv (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that too yesterday. It seems that when there's very few views on an article (less than 10 on the most viewed day?), it displays it with decimals. Not sure why the chart would do that; I'm using a third party component to render those. I'll take a look. henrik•talk 21:18, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Just what I wanted to hear. Jessemv (talk) 21:20, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I've wrote an article about "Sayed Hamid Noori". He was on of the leading journalist of Afghanistan. He was the anchor of state television in Afghanistan and he was the Vice-President of Journalists Association in Afghanistan.He got brutally killed in front of his house two years ago. His murderers are still not found and the government tries to make him forget.

The french foreign minister bernard Kouchner conodoladed when Mr Noori got killed. He was extremly important person for Afghanistan.You cand find a lot news in every big media and all over the world about him.

I have spent four hours to write the article and someone deleted it in a few seconds. Please help me to renew the article,please.It a was very good article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siddhartha90 (talk • contribs) 02:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

Annual article traffic counts

Hi Henrik,

I have been looking at the article traffic statistics that you set up. I have a question, is it possible to view data for the entire year rather than it being broken down into monthly summaries? I would for example like to view the traffic statistics for the whole of 2011 combined rather than just December.

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.49.184 (talk) 17:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

It used to be possible to view annual statistical reports by changing the url as in this example

from http://stats.grok.se/en/201112/User_talk:Henrik

to http://stats.grok.se/en/2011/User_talk:Henrik

but I see it no longer works. Ottawahitech (talk) 01:56, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Any chance of this being fixed? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:33, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Hm, perhaps, yes. The new interface allows up to 90 days, but it's too slow to allow a full year view. I'm working on setting up some form of data compaction to allow it to view full years again. That the old interface (sort of) worked was mostly an accident. henrik•talk 15:39, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

• Special report: The plight of the new page patrollers

• News and notes: Fundraiser row continues, new director of engineering

• Discussion report: Discussion on copyrighted files from non-US relation states

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Poland

• Featured content: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Civility enforcement closed, proposed decision in TimidGuy, two cases remain open

• Technology report: Major strands of development cycle coalesce as 1.19 is deployed to first wikis

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:06, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia article traffic statistics

hello,

how do you revert to the old-style grok.se? Thanks. ♫GoP♫_T^C_N 11:20, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

You go to http://stats-classic.grok.se henrik•talk 21:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Nice! Thanks!--♫GoP♫_T^C_N 13:03, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I think a good solution would be to add "60 day" and "90 day" links on the "stats-classic" display. These links would display the new format, showing those numbers of days. This approach would allow those of us who want mainly us to older, clearer display to do so, while still providing access to the great new feature of multi-month displays. Also, this would be easy for Henrik to accomplish, just by adding the links. (In the multi-month displays I am more intersted in a general impression, so the new layout is OK for that, but in the 30-day display I am more interested in the actual daily numbers.) Coastwise (talk) 22:29, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

• News and notes: Finance meeting fallout, Gardner recommendations forthcoming

• Recent research: Gender gap and conflict aversion; collaboration on breaking news; effects of leadership on participation; legacy of Public Policy Initiative

• Discussion report: Focus on admin conduct and editor retention

• WikiProject report: Just don't call it "sci-fi": WikiProject Science Fiction

• Featured content: By plane, by ship, and by stagecoach: Featured content goes trekking this week

• Arbitration report: Final decision in TimidGuy ban appeal, one case remains open

• Technology report: 1.19 deployment stress, Meta debates whether to enforce SUL

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 01:27, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

http://stats.grok.se/

Hello! I have seen that you are the creator of http://stats.grok.se/ and I wonder if it is closed? It has not worked for months and I thought that it was a good tool to see how many views each page had. If it is closed: Do you know anything similar to that tool? - Green Yoshi _{talk page · contributions} 13:34, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Hm? Apart from a brief snafu tonight, it's up and running. If something doesn't work, please let me know about it. henrik•talk 07:32, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't know why, if it works for you. Nothing happens for me in any web browser and after a while I get the message "Anslutningen avbröts. Servern på stats.grok.se svarar inte." (I don't think I need to translate it into English for you) in Firefox and similar messages in other browsers. It has been like that since spring last year (I think). - Green Yoshi _{talk page · contributions} 15:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Have you tried it from a different location? It seems like some sort of network issue. Which ISP do you use? henrik•talk 15:40, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

That was interesting; it works on my mobile phone with Telenor. On my computer, I use a mobile broadband, also from Telenor. - Green Yoshi _{talk page · contributions} 15:47, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

Do you know what the problem is? - Green Yoshi _{talk page · contributions} 17:10, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

User Box

Not sure if you have noticed but User:Henrik/live-edit-counter is no longer working... When you click on the link it tells you that the user account has expired. -- RP459 ^Talk/_{Contributions} 23:34, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Should work now. -- œ^™ 09:22, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Cool, thanks. Hah! I'd completely forgotten about that user box, I'm glad people have kept it working :) henrik•talk 09:57, 1 March 2012 (UTC)