User:Amgine/Wikidata random sample test 2

This is a simple check to examine recent user contributions on Wikidata vs WMF global contributions. My hypothesis is at least one of these 10 contributors will have reduced their non-Wikidata contributions, or xyr most recent edits will solely be to Wikidata, which is a reasonable proxy measure of contributor poaching.

This is variant on a theme; LauraHale suggested a much stronger study using a better methodology (and easier tools.)

MethodologyEdit

Using a snapshot of recent changes on Wikidata to identify a random sample of human contributors (Grabbed 500 recent entries, selecting the first unique username after rows 0, 50, 100, 150, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, and 450.) Used Global account manager (GAM) to identify each user's total contributions to Wikidata, their 'home wiki', and the wiki they have the largest total contributions (if different.) Where an account name is not found via GAM, Global user contribution beta tool is used as a fallback. This tool does not report 'home wiki', so only the largest total contributions wiki is used.

With these three wikis identified, use X!'s Edit Counter to break out the contributor's monthly contributions on each. Simple comparisons are the only ones used due to the unreliability of the data. (The users found use their SUL accounts for automated editing, therefore simple contribution numbers are not a reliable measure of editor engagement.)

OutputEdit

AmaryllisGardener
  home  
  Wikidata en.WP sco.WP
2013/01   216  
2013/02 236 43 590
2013/03 303 43 1834
2013/04 229 78 1780
2013/05 312 29 2030
2013/06 469 54 1054
2013/07 1351 52 1789
2013/08 1068 25 2518
2013/09 1800 500 927
2013/10 1269 328 833
2013/11 438 18 557
Ladsgroup
  Wikidata fa.WP
2012/10   101
2012/11 4 302
2012/12 0 135
2013/01 4 273
2013/02 90 121
2013/03 498 329
2013/04 271 389
2013/05 206 161
2013/06 114 324
2013/07 111 647
2013/08 55 200
2013/09 187 659
2013/10 112 254
2013/11 159 131
TintoMeches
  Wikidata it.WP
User has not opted-in
totals displayed
  11849 3277
Cekli829
  home
  Wikidata az.WP
2013/01   633
2013/02 15 794
2013/03 19 944
2013/04 42 630
2013/05 46 1028
2013/06 82 746
2013/07 54 569
2013/08 36 354
2013/09 31 725
2013/10 172 1627
2013/11 236 404
Jbribeiro1
  home  
  Wikidata en.WP pt.WP
2013/03   8 360
2013/04 53 63 1722
2013/05 140 140 3349
2013/06 82 91 2108
2013/07 86 245 2072
2013/08 86 131 1912
2013/09 65 90 1736
2013/10 80 208 2202
2013/11 57 196 1144
Manlleus
  Wikidata ca.WN
Data unavailable
totals reported
  49 503
Чаховіч Уладзіслаў
  home  
  Wikidata ru.WP be.WP
User has not opted-in
totals displayed
  19357 921 105296
Place Clichy
  home
  Wikidata fr.WP
User has not opted-in
totals displayed
  10324 16147
Alexmar983
  home
  Wikidata it.WP
User has not opted-in
totals displayed
  966 16145
Thieol
  home
  Wikidata fr.WP
User has not opted-in
totals displayed
  40241 848

DiscussionEdit

100% of the sampled human contributors to Wikidata have previous WMF project involvement prior to editing Wikidata.

The human contributors to Wikidata make use of automated processes for editing using their SUL accounts. This makes the revision count a weak measure for user engagement with a wiki.

Half of the sample did not opt-in to directly measure their contributions over time. Additional coding would be necessary to extract this information directly from their contribution history, and I'm not willing to put in that time for this simple study. Of those for whom we do have monthly data, at least one (AmaryllisGardener) appears to have an increasing or steady trend on Wikidata, while involvement on home or highest contribution sites have steady or decreasing trends. Of those who have not opted-in, 2 (Place Clichy and Thieol) have higher averaged rates of involvement with Wikidata over their more-longstanding home wikis.

ConclusionsEdit

The evidence strongly suggests Wikidata competes with sister projects for contributors, however the measures are not effective and may not reflect contributor effort or engagement.