Author Statistics!

[MattKestrel]

Disclaimer: I in no way advocate the interpretation of features alone to discern mapping quality and skill, or that people with less than three features do not deserve to be in this chart. They were merely removed as they completely clogged up the charts in the first version of these statistics and left no room for other users.

For all intents and purposes, I'm deeming anyone with more than 2 features an author to avoid confusion. If this is a sniping risk, please delete the thread. I've counted multiple accounts too, otherwise MidnightGetaway would have the most features per maps by a long shot.

The system is now in v3, and will now only receive weekly updates, moved to a Sunday for convenience. Enjoy the stats!

Family trip to Devon prevented me from getting this done sooner. However, all of the stats exclude maps that were made after Sunday, so it doesn't count maps which would'nt have counted if I /did/ update it on Sunday. Kapiche?

Position Changes have also been implemented, so you can track your favorite authors. ^ means they've gone up, v means they've gone down, and * means they've entered the charts anew.

Updated 30/08/09

Congratulations go to ganteka this week, for becoming a new Author. :D

[Tunco]

There should be a page on Numa under the "Other", called Numa statics. It could be weekly/monthly though.

Good job.

[Aphex]

<aphex> cool
<aphex> I'd like to see some clearer labelling of rows though...
<aphex> other than that cool :P


yup. good job.

[Seneschal]

Hmm. It's kinda nice and depressing to see I'm not the only one doing things like this.
Good work on gathering all the stats. It's a good job you didn't do highest feature/map ratio for more than one feature, or Official_NUMA would have won hands down...
Couple of minor pedantic points: first, you spelled formica wrong, second, I don't think all the numbers are accurate - the number of featured maps in a person's profile is often wrong. A few examples of this would be mintnut, 9400 and LostTortuga. Their profiles say they have 4, 3 and 7 whereas they actually have 2, 2 and 6 respectively.

[MattKestrel]

Erm... boo.

Well you get the gist, right? D:

I took into account multiple accounts (but not Corncobs and Mirage, I'll do them next time) and I also typo'd Spudzalot.

[sheganican]

Fromica? LostTortuga? Never heard of either of them.

Very confusing chart, man, and i dont really see the point in all these ratios.

[epigone]

Interesting. I always like looking at stuff like this. Nice job compiling your data.

[Seneschal]

Here - this may be helpful. I don't think it's completely accurate, but I'm pretty sure at least 95% of the numbers are correct.

[MattKestrel]

Oh, cheers. I'll look for the number of maps later and possibly make a more accurate/useful/readable version.

Shouldn't we split corncobs/ mirage into the different users, seeing as they're collab accounts?

[Tunco]

Fromica? LostTortuga? Never heard of either of them.

Very confusing chart, man, and i dont really see the point in all these ratios.

First of all, it's Formica.

And, this was needed, you should have seen the point. :/

Great job, GTM.

[sheganican]

Fromica? LostTortuga? Never heard of either of them.

Very confusing chart, man, and i dont really see the point in all these ratios.

First of all, it's Formica.

And, this was needed, you should have seen the point. :/

Great job, GTM.

Oh yea, i got them now. Thanks Tunco123. Sorry intruding.

[Seneschal]

Oh, cheers. I'll look for the number of maps later and possibly make a more accurate/useful/readable version.

Shouldn't we split corncobs/ mirage into the different users, seeing as they're collab accounts?

Yeah, I forgot to do that :/
Updated version:

[otters~1]

I want to see a 'no reviews with unread comments' thingy when I log on, because the comments are mostly about the reviews nowadays. I like to keep track of my fanmail. GET ON IT.

[MattKestrel]

I've updated the charts and added some new ones, much love goes to Seneschal for the correct (mostly) data.

[Seneschal]

Yay! Great job with all the stats, glad I could help. I'm a real nerd for this kind of thing, so it's all very interesting for me. Hopefully I'm not the only one, though...

[Nexx]

Very interesting. Thanks for compiling all the data! :)

[lord_day]

Cool group of stats. I was wondering, if a collab was featured, did you include both authors in it?

[MattKestrel]

Yep. That's one of the changes from the old version. All of the constituent contributors of mirage features were noted too.

[Rose]

Yay! Great job with all the stats, glad I could help. I'm a real nerd for this kind of thing, so it's all very interesting for me. Hopefully I'm not the only one, though...

I found this very interesting too :D

/me hopes for two more features so he can get on the charts too >.>

[Amadeus]

I think it's great to have the statistics all, and don't want to put them down, but there's some major errors and subjective statistics that need fixing.

Number of featured maps is cool. It's good someone took into account all the collaborations and such.

1. The whole newest authors on Numa is screwed up. I mean, new users are registering everyday - how can you say the most recent in SuperstardomX? He doesn't even map anymore. If you're going for significant authors, that's much too subjective for my liking. The oldest authors is cool (I thought Yahoozy was much older though). However, it's not really accurate. Again, you only take into account significant authors. I'd put in only authors still active today (Blue Tetris, Atob, Evil Bob, Shortshift, Sweep, and Yahoozy).

2. I'm assuming there's a minimum amount of features to be on the feature ratio list, otherwise authors with one feature and low map counts (Kiaora for example) would be included.

3. Most frequent mappers again includes authors subjectively. There are a lot of mappers who submit more than one map a day.

The rest of the data was cool. Nice work.

[Ampersand]

I like where this is going, but I'm very confused as to how you gathered and compiled your data, as it seems horribly incomplete. Wouldn't Arachnid himself be the oldest author - And if not, wouldn't LV? Vyacheslav? Suki? Myself? Any of us who were around prior to Evil_Bob?

Kinda same deal with the other tables - LV's only had two features, and same with Dave. I've only had one, and I know a metric-shitton of authors who have yet to be featured at all, so wouldn't they make the list before any of the others?

I'd be really interested to see how this was compiled.

[Nexx]

1. The whole newest authors on Numa is screwed up. I mean, new users are registering everyday - how can you say the most recent in SuperstardomX? He doesn't even map anymore. If you're going for significant authors, that's much too subjective for my liking. The oldest authors is cool (I thought Yahoozy was much older though). However, it's not really accurate. Again, you only take into account significant authors. I'd put in only authors still active today (Blue Tetris, Atob, Evil Bob, Shortshift, Sweep, and Yahoozy).

I like where this is going, but I'm very confused as to how you gathered and compiled your data, as it seems horribly incomplete. Wouldn't Arachnid himself be the oldest author - And if not, wouldn't LV? Vyacheslav? Suki? Myself? Any of us who were around prior to Evil_Bob?

Kinda same deal with the other tables - LV's only had two features, and same with Dave. I've only had one, and I know a metric-shitton of authors who have yet to be featured at all, so wouldn't they make the list before any of the others?

Guys, READ the first post, don't just glance over it. The THIRD sentence of the first post reads:

For all intents and purposes, I'm deeming anyone with more than 2 features an author to avoid confusion.

He didn't include the other people because he wasn't aiming to. The point is to collect and analyze feature-related stats, not just general stats.

[Amadeus]

Oh, ha. All that small print at the top.

[MattKestrel]

Yeah, what Avarin said.

The oldest/ most recent chart wasn't subjective at all. It was based entirely on a minimum feature quota. Otherwise, the stats would be been /very/ hard to compile without some sort of scripting going on.

If I did make a series of charts that involved people with 2 features, or even 1 features, they would be the /vast/ majority and remove any other more established mappers from the tables.

[Ampersand]

Guys, READ the first post, don't just glance over it. The THIRD sentence of the first post reads:

I'm a very busy man. I don't have time to read entire posts. In fact, this is the only part of your post I read. I still don't understand what you're getting at, really.