User blog:CosmicChronos/HPW Analysis

Hello!

I'd like to first point out that, I got this information from the Community Council, I'm a councillor there.

Now that that's out of the way, I'd like to show you this very interesting analysis of the situation concerning viewership on the HPW. It shows how popular different platforms are, and how we could improve to make this wiki more accessible to those platforms. I don't agree with everything, but I see some interesting ideas and proposals in the document, that I'd like to discuss with the people here.

Most Popular Pages
As we can see in the document, Gellert Grindelwald is the most visited page in October, this is not strange with the upcoming release of 🇨🇬 on 16 November (in the UK and USA). Otherwise, the most popular pages are to be expected... The Main Page will be visited very often almost by every visitor. Then we have the usual ones like Tom Riddle, Harry Potter and Albus Dumbledore. Newton Scamander is also popular, this is very likely because of the nearing release, once again of 🇨🇬. What surprised me the most of this was "In total, the wiki saw 14,161,831 pageviews in October." Perhaps it shouldn't, but it just strikes me as such a missed opportunity for new users. Now let's talk about the Suggestions made by FANDOM to improve viewership:


 * Suggestion 1: Reduce warnings at the top of the page wherever possible
 * So as FANDOM points out, the amount of warnings at the top of some pages can be exhausting, or perhaps confusing. I think their idea of combining spoiler warnings is a good idea. Either we could just have a Spoiler Template, and filling in the concerned titles, or we could combine templates for spoilers of movies/content of similar themes or part of the same series (like combining the and ). This last idea may not seem ideal right now, as there are only e.g. two movies in the Fantastic Beasts series, but in the future, to have to put up to five titles in a spoiler warning may become in and of itself quite heavy or confusing to some users.
 * As for removing Protected Pages warnings... I quite agree with FANDOM. They don't have anything to do with the article, and should instead be displayed in the Editor. (Here are the links FANDOM provided for ease of access: I, II, III)


 * Suggestion 2: Place concise intro paragraphs at the very beginning of your content
 * I fully agree with the first suggestion. Intro paragraphs are an easy way to summarise information about a character. It's easy for new users to find the information they're looking for, and may improve the quality of some articles. However, I do not see the reason to move quotes below the table of contents. Their argument about it appearing in searches I feel is a non problem, after all, usually users come to search for quick information about their age, gender, race, D.O.D., etc. which is already displayed in google searches as they are part of the infoboxes, which are a the top of the page, and therefore display in the search snippets.

Bouncy Pages and User Retainment
"A ​“bounce” is when a reader enters a page and then closes the tab​ instead of clicking any link on the page."

- FANDOM

As FANDOM notes, when a "bounce" happens, we lose a possible user, which is always unfortunate. Now they've blessed us with some statistics, and we can see that the most bounced pages are Hogwarts Houses with a 63.28% bounce rate, then we have List of Spells with 60.41% (Hopefully this will change soon, see Talk:List of Spells for more info!), third place is Horcrux with 44.31%. They also tell us that most of our articles have a low bounce rate, so that's good, but we want to have a low bounce rate on all pages! Here are some problems with our pages:
 * Problem 1:
 * Hogwarts Houses seems like an ideal article, good intro, not too many warnings, etc. However, as FANDOM pointed out in their Analysis, the intro for the pages doesn't even mention the name of the Houses. FANDOM proposes that we include the names of the houses, perhaps instead of the names of it's founders. I agree with that, however I feel like the names of the founders should stay, it is after all quite relevant to the article. Then they propose we could even create a Graphic Module with links to all the four houses displaying the four crests of the Hogwarts houses. It seems IMO like a great idea, that we could even implement in the Ilvermorny article (or a future Ilvermorny Houses article) with links to the corresponding houses.


 * Problem 2:
 * This problem has already been discussed at Talk:List of Spells. We have "fixed" it. H2s are supposed to be automatically closed on mobile devices, however there is a bug (apparently on all devices)that creates the opposite, and opens the page with all of the H2 headers already open. This bug has been reported to Staff and is being addressed at this moment.


 * Problem 3:
 * Here we come back to the problematic intro paragraphs, not even mentioning Voldemort, nor his horcruxes. FANDOM points out that most users come to the Horcrux page in search of more information about the Dark Lord. We could perhaps add a little paragraph before the Table of Content that talks about known manufacturers of Horcruxes (Voldemort and Herpo the Foul).

Main Page Viewership
As we can see with the initial graphic, Users who view the Main Page access it with Tablets 7.8% of the time, Mobiles 45.6% and on Desktop 46.6%. FANDOM tells us that this is normal, and that most wikis are the same, that is majorly accessed with mobile devices (53% of the time). It would be no surprise to think that the Main Page is the front page, and the entrance for most users into the Wiki, but that is very much not the case. Indeed, only 1.9% of users enter through the Main Page! Most users enter through Google. This shows that most users come the HPW for information, but do not decide to stay. "I open Fandom every day because it reliably delivers to me the deepest and most engaging content for all the movies and books I love and helps me discover new fandoms."

- Fandom's Vision

FANDOM explains that this is their Long-Term Vision for all of their services, including the Harry Potter Wiki. "Making this vision a reality will take a lot of work. And while most of this work will be on us at Fandom, we also want to give you the tools and information to do what you can on your wiki."
 * What we can do:
 * FANDOM's working hard on this issue, be sure to check out their Staff Blog as they will be releasing information about this issue soon!
 * Check out the wiki more often using Mobile Devices to see how most of our users experience the wiki!

Most Searched Pages
"Your readers use site search on average 5,000 to 6,000 times per day. In total, readers searched the Harry Potter Wiki 179,219 times in October."

Here are the most searched pages in October: These results show us that the top viewed pages are not quite the same as these ones, and so we can assume that people found their ways to those pages through Google searches, wiki navigation, or links on different Articles. Here's what Fandom thinks we could do:
 * Verify results:
 * ​Try to ​put yourself in the shoes of a curious casual Harry Potter fan​ and take a look at the results for each of the searches. Did you find what you were searching for and does the result contain all the relevant information? If not, consider editing the pages to add anything that is missing and make sure the most relevant details are easily found at or near the top.


 * Put a spotlight on Hogwarts houses:​
 * People are clearly interested in the four houses and having a harder time finding them than they do with other hot topics. Perhaps consider adding them to the local navigation and double-checking that they are linked on all articles where they are prominently mentioned (like in the Houses article’s introductory paragraph).


 * Throw Movie Premiere Editing Parties:
 * ​This one is more of a loose idea to consider. People are clearly excited for the movie and what it will add to the Potter canon. You’ll want to have any new details the movie reveals included on your popular pages as fast as possible. This goes for any future movie or book releases as well.

I'm pretty sceptical about that last one as it seems like a perfect opportunity for vandals to troll, but of course these proposals can and hopefully will be discussed within the community.

So that was it! Hopefully you enjoyed my not-so-short recap of the analysis. I'd be glad to here what people think, so please make sure to comment what you think we should do to improve the quality and accessibility of the wiki! Cheers,   CosmicChronos       Talk to me       Contribs    15:04, November 11, 2018 (UTC)