Connected Internet - Latest Comments in Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

mv3gp — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:37:44 -0000

I think WikiPedia results should be kept different. i think the information resource on wikipedia should have another category just like groups, web, images

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

horisly — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 22:55:33 -0000

agree with your point.
"the Wikipedia page comes out top even if the content on the page isnâ€™t great or isnâ€™t even appropriate. "
google is giving to much emphases to wikipedia. that is unfair to other site.

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

Jamdo — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 20:18:19 -0000

listikal - yeah, it depends what you are searching though. If you are looking for the history of tennis, or something general interest, then wikipedia is probably fine. If you are looking to find the state of Iran's nuclear weapons program, which type of reactors they have and an intelligent assessment of the real threat, then fas.org or globalsecurity.com (for example) should be coming up a lot higher in the results and wikipedia should be NOWHERE near the top of your keywords search IMHO.

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

listikal — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 11:49:57 -0000

24% is a huge surprise to me. It doesn't really bother me that it's results come up every time. I typically end up checking it first anyway.

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

Ceglie Messapica — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:14:11 -0000

Besides Wikipedia has external links with rel=nofollow that is against Internet filosofy.

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

John — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 07:08:56 -0000

I agree it's a shame they nofollow links as it does mess with the linking structure of the web and many of the links are relevant and useful.

Re: Google Accounts For 24% Of All Wikipedia Traffic

Jamdo — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 00:21:40 -0000

Following the ethos that 20 idiots does not equal an expert, I think as Google's algorythm gets better and better at detecting quality info as opposed to info that happens to suit Google's current flawed algorythm, wikipedia will slip further down the results.

Wikipedia is great, and it's community and it's all very web 2.0 blah blah blah, but in specific areas there are plenty of sites with better quality of information that rank lower on the relevant keywords.