CZ Talk:PageRank analysis of Citizendium articles: Difference between revisions
imported>Peter Schmitt m (Talk:PageRank analysis of Citizendium articles moved to CZ Talk:PageRank analysis of Citizendium articles: This clearly is not a "main space" article) |
imported>Thomas Wright Sulcer (→Subpages thingie: r) |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Experiment March 2010== | ==Experiment March 2010== | ||
Perhaps this belongs in a CZ: type page? I don't know. But it links to SEO, SERP, etc. This may be helpful for people in future (so they can figure out more quickly what it took me longer to figure out.) I removed the "original article creator" field from the columns, as well as my other Google ranking assessment (which wasn't as accurate as "PageRank").--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 03:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | Perhaps this belongs in a CZ: type page? I don't know. But it links to SEO, SERP, etc. This may be helpful for people in future (so they can figure out more quickly what it took me longer to figure out.) I removed the "original article creator" field from the columns, as well as my other Google ranking assessment (which wasn't as accurate as "PageRank").--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 03:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | ||
==Wondering how to do a correlation analysis== | |||
If anybody knows how to do a correlation or regression analysis on this data and put it into a chart, that would be appreciated. Does it need more data to function?--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 10:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
==Subpages thingie== | |||
I removed the <nowiki>{{subpages}}</nowiki> notice at the top of the page; is this right? There was some warning that the subpages system doesn't work on the CZ-type articles. If I goofed please undo my choice.--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 12:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
: No, it's quite ok. I would have done it, too. I only added the links so that these pages are "found". --[[User:Peter Schmitt|Peter Schmitt]] 12:46, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
::Thanks! And good idea!--[[User:Thomas Wright Sulcer|Thomas Wright Sulcer]] 13:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 07:01, 22 March 2010
Experiment March 2010
Perhaps this belongs in a CZ: type page? I don't know. But it links to SEO, SERP, etc. This may be helpful for people in future (so they can figure out more quickly what it took me longer to figure out.) I removed the "original article creator" field from the columns, as well as my other Google ranking assessment (which wasn't as accurate as "PageRank").--Thomas Wright Sulcer 03:02, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Wondering how to do a correlation analysis
If anybody knows how to do a correlation or regression analysis on this data and put it into a chart, that would be appreciated. Does it need more data to function?--Thomas Wright Sulcer 10:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Subpages thingie
I removed the {{subpages}} notice at the top of the page; is this right? There was some warning that the subpages system doesn't work on the CZ-type articles. If I goofed please undo my choice.--Thomas Wright Sulcer 12:33, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- No, it's quite ok. I would have done it, too. I only added the links so that these pages are "found". --Peter Schmitt 12:46, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks! And good idea!--Thomas Wright Sulcer 13:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)