File talk:Top Wikipedians compared to the rest of the community.png
Units
[edit]What are the units for this graph? Many of the numbers are identified as percents, which is obviously not correct. Should it be gross number of edits? If that's the case, why do the numbers have only one digit after the last comma (e.g. 6,020,833,1)? Also why is there a comma followed immediately by a full-stop in the red box 25,680,.209? This graphic needs some serious work; right now it is effectively meaningless and makes the article suspect. NBruschi (talk) 22:27, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
- Edits. I just created a rough chart to show what goes where. The digit after the last comma is the percentage that the pie piece is. Considering how I had to standardize everything between the charts and whatnot, I am amazed that it isn't worse. I will probably run another update in a month or so as it takes over an hour and a lot of number crunching just to produce those three images so I am in no rush, honestly. Besides, the latest update came after I was able to finally get my laptop back after Dell bungled everything for almost a month so I just kind of pushed it out to publication. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Shouldn't the key be "Top contributors 1-1000" etc. rather than "Edits 1-1000" etc.? Otherwise it doesn't make a lot of sense as it appears that people that have made less than 1 edit contributed two thirds of wikipedia and no-one has contributed more than 10k edits. danno 21:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
- Still wrong on the Nov 12 versions. Johnbod (talk) 16:01, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- Shouldn't the key be "Top contributors 1-1000" etc. rather than "Edits 1-1000" etc.? Otherwise it doesn't make a lot of sense as it appears that people that have made less than 1 edit contributed two thirds of wikipedia and no-one has contributed more than 10k edits. danno 21:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)