What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Join the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Facebook view!
facebook.com/DragonAgeOrigins - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
35 Comments
- Zwart, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Ah, a proper technical tip at last..... Cheers m8. Much appreciated.............
- adjustafresh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Block him - that's what the little "No" icon is for to the right of the user's name and time they posted.
- Nogger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Note that your total numbers will double. You count 1 for the page you visit (as usual) and then you instruct Analytics to also count a hit and note the URL as being the one in the referer.
There is no need to put the usual counting call into the head of the page as the article claims, you also don't need to put the second call into the onload. You can just append it to the first call.
To avoid the doubling of the total numbers, You could change the UrchinID to a second profile before the second call. Then, the full referer in the second call will be logged only to the other profile.
But props on the idea, it is a good one. - SimonDonkers, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3If people would actually read Google's helpfiles they would even go as far as to notice Google even recommands this hack:
http://www.google.com/support/analytics/bin/answer.py?answer=27288
I very much doubt Google is going to disable this. - Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I can't tell you how many times I've tried to figure out where traffic was coming from and all analytics would tell me is that it came from some forum.
Thanks for the hack! - ScienceBlog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Sweet. I always thought that was an annoying omission.
- Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I wonder why Google doesn't implement something like this. I mean they've already got the data for it right?
- kbrower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@onlyshawn
http://krisbrower.com/2007/01/15/google-analytics-full-referrer-url/ - d0odx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Mano70 thanks a LOT for submitting this. I was JUST about to drop analytics today due to them lacking the full ref.
- xistboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can't wait to see the results
- ph3rny, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I think that this hack would work if you just simply replaced the urchintracker() function that google gave you in code with the one in the onload
someone confirm this as i am not sure - eppler, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I've seen the same URL referenced, I wonder why the digg.com staff doesn't prevent posts with that address referenced?
- glenfiddich, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1of course you could always use the following:
body onload="javascript:urchinTracker("referrer:"+document.referrer);"
and then create a filter to exclude URIs containing the "referrer" string - one321, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Any problems found with this? If not... very exciting!
- jus1haz2, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://duggmirror.com
This 9/11 guy is just not going to stop.... *sigh* - pittbug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I modified the javascript again so it detects whether the page is in http or https mode and pulls the appropriate urchin.js from google (to avoid security errors in the browser). At the same time the code will only write out the urchinTracker(document.referrer) line if it detects that the page was called from an external referrer - this prevents cluttering up the top content report with your own pages listed as a referrer.
http://www.reubenyau.com/google-analytics-tracking-code-https-and-full-external-referrer-only/ - glenfiddich, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As a Google Analytics Authorized Consultant, I can see the creativity in this method.
However, with this hack you're really emulating an extra page view, thereby artificially doubling your traffic.
Also, Google Analytics only stores so much of the URI, that's why it's truncated at the querystring parameter for referrers.
It is indeed one of the most frustrating aspects of GA, especially when most of your referrers come from forums or blogs.
On my wishlist of future features for GA is the addition of extra settable variables, just like Omniture and WebTrends offer. - Skitzzo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't see why google would fix it. if nothing else they might incorporate the hack into their own reporting since it's a VERY legit use and something that is very much needed in their reports.
- EgoDemens, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@bitcloud
If people make stupid comments, like yours, they get dugg down, like you did. If they troll every god damn story with the same off-topic crap they get blocked. But at the end of the day it's up to the individual user what they do so don't spin this as some "Digg is teh big brother!!11" *****. - Ulvund, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1i wonder why they don't offer it when primitive counters offer it.
come on give us results - 47knight, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I have a question, does this code go with the addition of the existing google code, or instead?
- bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Nope.. i'm still not understanding what URL you're refering to...
the Article URL? or is there some other URL you're talking about when you say "9/11 guy"?
Because I can't see any URL or any "9/11 guy" in the comments...
I haven't blocked anyone, and the second comment is "This 9/11 guy is just not going to stop.... *sigh*" - OnlyShawn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0so, i add his tag IN ADDITION to the google analytics tag, correct? goog tag stays at the end, right before the end body tag, and this new one goes in the head section?
I'm assuming that's the case; just making sure.
Also....sorta sucks this is on digg; i'm sure goog will find a way to disable it if they don't want it. Cool nonetheless while it works, though. - cjacks9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Good stuff. I'll have to give this one a try. We're still using the Urchin version of Analytics (pre-Google buyout), but it may still work.
- OnlyShawn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0dammit...nevermind. standard GOOG tag goes in the head, not at the end where goog wants it, then you stick his code in the body.
gottit. learning process. - OnlyShawn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nogger...thanks for the input. could you dumb that down a little for those of us lower on the scale? I'd like to not have a double count, of course...though, i'm not sure it would matter with the 20 or so visits I get a week. :) I'm much more interested in learning the process.
- earlpearl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2That is a cool great trick!
- pittbug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+047knight: Take the existing Google tracking code and place it in the HEAD section, then add the body tag and you're all set.
- pittbug, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0one321: only small issue I've found so far is that it clutters up your top content report with the full referrering URLs.
OnlyShawn: no, not in additioon, move the tracking code up to the HEAD section. The key to this working is that the tracking script needs come before you call the urchinTracker function. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Awesome hack! A++++
- Navaneeth, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Way Cool.... I was searching for this in all the experts - so called - blogs and I found it here at last,,,,
Thanks a lot... - roombaroid, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0this is awesome!
- dmron, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Check out Clicky Web Statistics, and you'll see all this information up front, without the need for any hacks. Plus a whole lot more. :)
http://getclicky.com - bitcloud, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1Is digg starting to adopt censorship? I'm seeing more of these posts of "block him" but not the offending post....
- scabbers, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1If you don't want people to track the sites you've come from, type
about:config
and set "network.http.sendRefererHeader" to "0"
(firefox)
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is