User:Franamax/Ucontribs-2009

Guide to interpretation

 * First of all, beware of editcountitis! Number of edits is not the same as quality of edits. However, the distribution of edits can give some clues as to where the editor's interests lie.
 * Edits to a space and its associated talkspace are deliberately mashed together. This follows my theory that discussion is just as important as action, especially in the mainspace and also in many parts of the project (WP) space. Userspace is quite different, most uspace edits will be to the editor's own page(s) but user talk edits may be informative.
 * "Career" edits are reported, as are "recent" edits (last 300 days here). This gives a look at how the editor has participated since they joined the project and what they have been doing recently. Key points to look for here are shifts in focus (from article writing to projectspace contributions say) and slowdowns (or speedups) in participation in general.
 * "Page family" reports can give an idea of where the editor concentrates their attention. Many other edit-listing tools will highlight "most-edited" pages, but this is the only one I know of which can group together participation in various project areas. Two examples which spring to mind are WP:AFD and WP:MILHIST, but if you examine each editor you will find a wide variety of interests.
 * New to this version of the tool is a line at the bottom of each listing showing the percentage of edits and pages represented in the data. This gives an idea of how concentrated the editor has been in their work.
 * And finally, remember that on-wiki edits do not represent the sum total of any editor's contributions to the project. Much work is conducted off-line, such as formal mediation, admin actions and ArbCom work for the arbs. Don't take this as the full picture! Franamax (talk) 03:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Implementation notes
This page contains output from version 0.3c of the uContribs program. Some notes for interpretation:
 * Beware of editcountitis! Counting number of edits gives no insight into whether the editor has actually made a contribution. Counting edits can however give some insight into where the editors interests lie in general terms.
 * The mainspace summaries here show the current status of the article (FA/GA/etc.) - but just because the editor has made many edits to the article does not mean that they were responsible for getting the article to its current rating.
 * Data is listed two different ways here:
 * The Career summary counts every contribution this editor has made (deleted edits excluded) and sorts by the combined total of article and talk edits. The career listing includes the "recent" edit count.
 * The "Recent" summary sorts the listing by recent edits, but still shows the career total edits. Recent is usually defined as 300 days-worth of edits.
 * Recent can be used to look at the editor's current interests. Career gives a look at everything they've been interested in since they started editing.
 * Wikipedia- and user-space summaries have an additional section for "page families". A page family is defined as the summation of any page and all of its sub-pages (if there is a "/" in the pagename, the family name is the text before the first "/"). The page family summary shows (in brackets) the total number of pages within the family. Not all of these will be shown in the detail display if a detail cutoff is reached.
 * History scans for highly active editors can cause internal table overflows, which are noted either in the "small print" or within detail tables. In the case of an overflow, the most recent pages will be listed, and all edits to that page will be listed. The current limits are 8,000 pages, 800 page families, and 2,000 pages within a family. Thanks to various editors for consistently breaking the previously set limits!
 * Start date and total edits come from soxred93 and do not include deleted edits.
 * This program is in intermittent development - if you spot any discrepancies in the data or presentation, please bring them to my attention! (Of course my software is always perfect the first time I write it, so I'm sure it's someone else's fault - but I'd still like to know ;) Franamax (talk) 07:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom 2009 Candidates
ArbCom candidate listings use a uniform 300-day cutoff as the "recent" parameter and start counting back from 01 November 2009. This is to prevent the "recent" summaries from being affected by the current election and any possible aftermath from the previous one.


 * User:Secret includes figures for User:Jaranda

Sitting Arbitrators
Arbitrator listings use a uniform 300-day cutoff as the "recent" parameter and start counting back from 01 November 2009.

Tranches are shown as best I can read this, corrections are welcome. Tranche Gamma is currently being replaced. Tranche Beta was elected last year (other tranches were topped up last year too). Tranche Alpha will be replaced next year. The latest state of play can be seen at the AC History page. Tranches may be eliminated as of this election.

* Currently marked as inactive (18Nov2009).

** Self-limited to a 2-year term.

Other Listings
These listings will have various different parameters. My own listing (User:Franamax) for example, uses a 120-day recent cutoff due to my pitiful overall history. The day-cutoff is shown in the "Rec Days" column.

Generally, none of these listings will have a "best-before" date, they start counting back from the second they are run.

If you'd like to see your own stellar record dissected for all to see, drop a note on the talk page.