Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements/Elements report

worth noting

I suggest adding another column for what we rated the article as importance to see discrepancies*

• noble gas, halogen ~27k
• chemical element ~57k
• periodic table ~197k

*Keeping in mind that importance and popularity are not synonymous. I know, but there is some correlation. Also, to what I checked, a lot of the elemental articles seemed well segregated into a 3-5k group, and 10-15k accesses one. I believe it is a decent segregation to call those as separate groups, but treat each article individually. Feel free to undo some of my ratings if I exagerrated. Nergaal (talk) 22:37, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

also, rating Uranium as a vital article but not a top article for us seems a bit strange-so I rerated it as top. Nergaal (talk) 22:38, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you mind either listing any changes you've made to the importance ratings or simply editing them in the table? I don't want to have to go through and check each one if you know which ones have changed. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:52, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

most of them are according to the threshold I've said on the wp:elements talkpage. but to be 100% wait for the logbot to see all the updates. pretty much above ~25k hits I've said as top, and above 10k as high. Nergaal (talk) 01:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Weird that nobleium is on the bottom of the list. Nergaal (talk) 23:01, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice! We already knew what the top importance articles where but now we have a very good idea which are viewed more often than others. One more level of detail that I would find useful is to add an asterisk or some indication of which articles are WP:VITAL. That way, we would know which articles are top importance as far as the WikiProject is concerned, Vital as far as the whole encyclopedia is concerned and most popular as far as our readers are concerned. We can then focus effort there to get maximum impact per unit of effort. --mav (talk) 21:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking of doing that. I'll wait until the next listbot update so I can verify Nergaal's reevaluations and add the asterisks at the same time. Other than that, I think I'm pretty much done with the report! I'll add a link to the announcements board and leave a note on the WP Chemistry talk page. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:39, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

June/July delay

Hey mates. I haven't been able to access stats.grok.se (the page view tracker), so I haven't been able to update the stats for the June/July edition. I've posted about this at the VP here. Hopefully this will get cleared up soon. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 15:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Move?

User:Cryptic C62/Elements → Wikipedia:WikiProject Elements/Elements report

• This is a biannual report for the Elements Wikiproject focusing on the first 118 elements, the groups, periods, and a few other supporting articles. This report, in addition to the Periodic Table by Quality, is meant to help the project's participants to focus their efforts as effectively as possible. User:Nergaal 22:44, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

Done. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 16:35, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Next?

When's the next edition coming out? (What happened to December 2010?) Lanthanum-138 (talk) 09:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)