Forum:Sitemeter Change

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > Sitemeter Change
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 4 July 2012 by Liquidhelium.


As you can see on the side of the page, there is a counter in the rail. When you press it, you are redirected to the sitemeter site, unable to see the stats. Well, I have asked a few admins (a while ago), if they even knew if they could or who could access the sitemeter statistics. None of them knew. It seems pretty useless to have these statistics if they are going to be locked up, and unused. Here is what I think we should do. I am thinking that we should change the site that counts the visitors and pages for us, and allow them to be visible to everyone (at certain restrictions). I found a site that would be good for this: http://www.histats.com/ . It easier to view and understand. If you'd like to see how it works for the italian one piece wiki, you can view it here: http://www.histats.com/viewstats/?SID=1597101&f=1 .

Discussion

Support Change - As nominator. Hair 23:44, April 26, 2012 (UTC)

Support - Would be useless if it doesn't work correctly. 2-3 cake.png Feeshee yay!Corrupted Ascension signet III.png 00:09, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - This suggests Azliq7 had some part in setting it up. Forum:Sitemeter suggests Karlis may also know something about it. I also found this and this. Neither are the most active of editors these days so I'm not sure how much use this information is. cqm talk 01:53, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I don't claim to know how sitemeter works, but is there any way to make the stats public instead, so we wouldn't end up losing our existing stats? Hofmic Talk 13:58, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I personally don't see the need for a global sitemeter at all. Quantcast is much better and (slightly) more accessible. SM is only useful for targeted projects like seeing the traffic for a particular bubble campaign or measuring search stats. ʞooɔ 19:27, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

I thought Quantcast was blocked off to us, due to Wikia having some weak excuse about competitors being able to see it? cqm talk 21:23, April 27, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - Guys, I'm still here... I could make the stats available to the public, but IP addresses of users may become visible to everyone. Some limited stats are available at User:Azliq7/sitemeter, so if you guys want me to update those regularly, I could.   az talk   08:01, April 28, 2012 (UTC)

That works for me =D cqm talk 13:03, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
Sounds good, Az. Ronan Talk 20:41, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
Although, I'd be fine with that.. We could possibly use all the stats from Sitemeter, Quantcast, and Hitstats. So then, we could use all the statistics to see whether or not the views are accurate. Hair 23:20, April 28, 2012 (UTC)
There's no reason to use three different traffic-measuring services. ʞooɔ 00:47, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
Wouldn't the thing in the original proposal update automatically though? sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 01:41, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
Yes, if we put the script in the common.js, like we did for the sitemeter. Hair 01:53, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
Well Az said he could update it regularly again if we wanted to.. So does the sitemeter update automatically or not? *Confused* sssSp7p.pngIjLCqFF.png 02:29, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
Sitemeter is always updated (otherwise the numbers of visits would be unmoving), however the uploads on that user subpage are when Az feels like it. Ryan PM 20:25, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Support replacing sitemeter - Az's page tells me that sitemeter's usefulness might not be that great, regardless of whether or not she is around to update it regularly. For example, the page says that 71.0% of users use Safari (and Chrome doesn't even show up in the pie chart), while 55.1% of users use Windows NT (presumably Windows 7 and Vista combined, as XP is separately shown at 16.3%). However, these two are difficult to reconcile. Even if all of the 26.5% of Mac users were browsing in Safari, that would require about two-thirds of the Windows users to be using Safari to get it up to the 71% shown in the browsers graph. I highly doubt that the Safari share amongst Windows users is greater than 5%. This inconsistency makes me question the usefulness or accuracy of the data. --LiquidTalk 17:46, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

It's because Chrome and Safari both use Webkit. They are alike when you look at them at a distance ignoring the UI. Ryan PM 20:18, April 29, 2012 (UTC)
On another note, telling the difference between 7 and Vista is minimal at most, it'll be a greater distinction later this year to next year when Windows 8 comes out. Ryan PM 20:25, April 29, 2012 (UTC)

Comment - I find statcounter's interface very good, and easy to use, so maybe we might be able to get statcounter to track data. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 20:16, May 1, 2012 (UTC)

Support - The one suggested on the top looks very good, very interactive and works good. I would like one you can actualy use. — Jr Mime (talk) 01:41, May 11, 2012 (UTC)

Split

Well, I have been reading this and seeing that no one understood at first how sitemeter worked *cough*Fergie*cough*, it should be best if we split the forum and redo the discussion considering that the discussion has died down too.

Proposal
1 - Follow the original proposal and replace sitemeter with histats.
2 - Change sitemeter, but use a different site such as statcounter, quantcast, or another one that can be suggested.
3 - Let azliq open up the stats to the public and/or update the sitemeter page.
4 - No change; Keep the sitemeter the same as it is.


Support 1 - Since I was the original nominator of this. Hair 21:40, May 21, 2012 (UTC)

Support 1 - I like this idea, histats is way better than sitemeter. — Jr Mime (talk) 02:40, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

Oppose showing stats to everyone - Sure, by all means replace Sitemeter with HiStats if it gives us better information more quickly. But I'm way against displaying the number of visits on every page to every user...it looks really vain and unprofessional on it.onepiece, and it's not something anybody but us would care about. If possible, display:none the stat counter on the sidebar, and have a project page set up where people can view the data. ʞooɔ 02:49, May 27, 2012 (UTC)

I support this. The title is misleading, we would still have publicly available stats, but they wouldn't be shown on every page (rather a single "project" page; perhaps "RuneScape:Stats"). However, I was under the impression that we manually added those stats to the sidebar with JavaScript. In which case, it'd be better to remove that part of the script than to display:none it. Hofmic Talk 19:42, May 27, 2012 (UTC)
We should keep it display:none Hofmic. Some users might want to change the css stylings of this and be able to see it. Hair 01:59, May 28, 2012 (UTC)
I was under the impression that if we moved to a different analytics site, we'd scrap the old one, as the new site would have more up to date stats, and there's no reason to bloat up the site with two analytics (possibility of conflict, as well). Of course, if, for whatever reason, we keep sitemeter too, you have a good point. Hofmic Talk 00:53, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
If we remove part of the script, the image won't load. The whole point of loading the image is that the sitemeter (or any other track site) gets the user's info via that image. If you add display:none, it will still send the info to the site, but if you just remove it, it won't send the info to the site anymore. JOEYTJE50TALKpull my finger 11:54, May 29, 2012 (UTC)
var _Hasync= _Hasync|| [];
 _Hasync.push(['Histats.start', '1,1937375,4,4,130,70,"00001001']);
 _Hasync.push(['Histats.fasi', '1']);
 _Hasync.push(['Histats.track_hits', '']);
 (function() { 
var hs = document.createElement('script'); 
hs.type = 'text/javascript';
 hs.async = true;
 hs.src = ('http://s10.histats.com/js15_as.js');
 (document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0] || document.getElementsByTagName('body')[0]).appendChild(hs); })();

// PLACE IMAGE ON PAGE
$(function() { 
if(skin == "oasis") { 
var $sidebar = $('.WikiaActivityModule:first');
var comboString = "<div style='margin-top:25px; align:center'><table style='width:100%'><td style='font-weight:bold;'>Visits since<br>May 2012:</td><td style='text-align:right'><div id='histats_counter'></div><a href='http://www.histats.com' target='_blank'><img src='http://sstatic1.histats.com/0.gif?1937375&101' alt='statistiche web' border='0'></a></td></tr></table></div>";   $sidebar.html($sidebar.html() + comboString); } else if(skin == "monobook") { var $sidebar = $('#p-wikicities-nav'); var comboString = "<div style='margin:5px'></div><h5>Statistiche</h5><div class='pBody'><div style='margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:5px'><table style='width:100%; text-align:center'><tr><td style='font-weight:bold; font-size:85%;'>Visits since May 2012:</td></tr><tr><td><div id='histats_counter'></div><a href='http://www.histats.com' target='_blank'><img src='http://sstatic1.histats.com/0.gif?1937375&101' alt='statistiche web' border='0'></a></td></tr></table></div></div>"; $sidebar.html($sidebar.html() + comboString); } });
Here's an example script for the Histats. If we were to take away the // PLACE IMAGE ON PAGE part, the code for tracking, labeled as hs.src, will still be available, so I don't think taking away the image will affect anything. I do think we should keep it though Smile. Hair 12:03, May 29, 2012 (UTC)

No change - The sitemeter is fine as it is, despite all of the above text walls. Ronan Talk 15:26, June 15, 2012 (UTC)

Closed - The discussion has been dead for a long time. There is no clear consensus to make any change. The proposers should make another thread outlining a clearer and perhaps narrower proposal to gather more support. --LiquidTalk 19:35, July 4, 2012 (UTC)