Research talk:New editor

Namespaces[edit]

Does this metric take into account all namespaces? if so the SQL needs some modifications NRuiz (WMF) (talk) 16:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is "all namespaces". See Research:New_editor#Edits_across_all_namespaces. --Halfak (WMF) (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While estimating the story points required to implement this, the developers still had questions about the SQL example given: it's unclear what the SQL is trying to do with namespaces, especially in the 'union' part. KLeduc (WMF) (talk) 21:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey KLeduc (WMF). The SQL is doing nothing with namespaces. Here are the docs on unions: [1] Seriously though, if you post the questions, I'll have an easier time answering them. --Halfak (WMF) (talk) 21:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sensitivity analysis for inclusion of edits on deleted pages[edit]

We haven't run a sensitivity analysis for the inclusion/exclusion of edits on pages that are later deleted as we did for active editors. DarTar (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Parameters other than the default[edit]

Let's assume n=2, and a user has made two edits: one in revision and one that's now in archive. The query would incorrectly say that this user has not passed this criteria. I know we don't want people changing the parameters, but I think we should make the query correct regardless. What do you think Aaron?

The query should say that they have passed the criteria. It sums up revisions in both the revision table and the archive when filtering rows. --Halfak (WMF) (talk) 17:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Faster query[edit]

Is there an alternative version which doesn't get killed? https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/5806 --Nemo 13:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]