> This shit is added without even a thought of what the hell you are trying to evaluate. Instead its everywhere and for what? What is the actionable information

> This shit is added without even a thought of what the hell you are trying to evaluate. Instead its everywhere and for what? What is the actionable information? They are trying to evaluate the effectiveness of the social sharing features in their various projects. There are any number of reasons to do this - maybe nobody uses these features and they can remove them, or maybe "New Readers video in Hindi distribution on Facebook" has an insane click through rate that might have an impact on the allocation of resources in the future/feed into other products being developed. You know, stuff you need to do when you run one of the worlds largest websites. It's also quite clearly spelled out in the linked page, the mailing list thread[1] and the implementation. If you can think of a better way to get this kind of data that fits more comfortably within your strong personal feelings about the contents of URLs then I'm sure the "insecure middle management type" that proposed it[2] would love to hear your counter-proposal. 1. https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2015-February/003426.html https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/analytics/2015-Februar... 2. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ABaso_(WMF) https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:ABaso_(WMF)