1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Google is sending 166% more traffic to Wikipedia than it was a year ago.

Discussion in 'Google' started by Monty, Feb 16, 2007.

  1. #1
    Hitwise just published the details of wikipedia traffic sources.

    Being everywhere in the SERPs seems to work well...
    SEMrush
     
    Monty, Feb 16, 2007 IP
    SEMrush
  2. Anita

    Anita Peon

    Messages:
    1,142
    Likes Received:
    51
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    (Note: here was my comment on the hitwise blog)

    Wow, that's a serious increase. However, if Wikipedia's share of U.S. traffic visits was up by 143%, but Google's downstream traffic to Wikipedia was up 166%, wouldn't that mean that other search engine's share downstream share increases were probably much lower than 143%?

    I've always noticed that Wikipedia articles seem to get ranked much higher in Google than other search engines, to me your analysis shows this.

    Anita :)
     
    Anita, Feb 16, 2007 IP
  3. mpls-web-design

    mpls-web-design Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    212
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    108
    #3
    I agree. Especially when you search for someone's name, Google often brings up wikipedia's result in the top 5 spots. I bet this has more to do with the trustworthiness of the wikipedia's site than the true value of its articles.
     
    mpls-web-design, Feb 16, 2007 IP
  4. Pierce

    Pierce Active Member

    Messages:
    634
    Likes Received:
    26
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    95
    #4
    i also agree that this is baised on trust, rather than content.

    if you google pearl necklace, wiki comes up first, but not exactly about pearl necklaces.

    I believe this is a flaw in their algorithm which needs to be corrected. Just because "wiki" is a god to many people doesnt mean it should get first preference for everything that may be a strong keyword hit.

    Pierce
     
    Pierce, Feb 16, 2007 IP
  5. MediaHustler

    MediaHustler Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,860
    Likes Received:
    46
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    120
    #5
    Wow that is an INSANE increase.
     
    MediaHustler, Feb 17, 2007 IP
  6. gr8liverpoolfan

    gr8liverpoolfan Notable Member

    Messages:
    6,719
    Likes Received:
    538
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    285
    #6
    There are few terms for which wikipedia doesn't come up in the first page.

    Wiki content is pretty good, so I have no problems with em coming up in the first page. Although there have been occasions when I have seen some wrong content posted over there......
     
    gr8liverpoolfan, Feb 17, 2007 IP
  7. Motter

    Motter Peon

    Messages:
    403
    Likes Received:
    5
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #7
    isn't it due to the trust and quality of content? I mean. wiki has users make these HUGE well written articles about some thing or someone for free. then those users can't even take credit for the article and the G sends all of that users previous traffic to wiki to read his new article.

    rofl
     
    Motter, Feb 17, 2007 IP
  8. budlight

    budlight Peon

    Messages:
    77
    Likes Received:
    1
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    wow good example, stuff like that and various copyright issues will be the end of wikipedia.

    Sure porn is a part of life now, but google can't have people making up sexual acts and slipping them into wikipedia, and subsequently going into no porn searches.

    If wikipedia didn't rank so well in google it would end up being an even better resource I think.
     
    budlight, Feb 19, 2007 IP
  9. wibr

    wibr Peon

    Messages:
    206
    Likes Received:
    7
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    Wiki ranking so high in google is silly. Why go to google and look for something when a user can simply bypass google (the middle man) and go straight to wiki and type in their search term there?

    That's what I started doing. If I need reference materials it's easier to just go straight to wiki now.
     
    wibr, Feb 20, 2007 IP
  10. seo_kate

    seo_kate Peon

    Messages:
    362
    Likes Received:
    3
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    great idea wibr.
     
    seo_kate, Feb 20, 2007 IP
  11. BuenosAires

    BuenosAires Peon

    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    6
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #11
    this is what i always say... wikipedia is so famous now that people will go there if they want to look up reference type info... so surely all the wikipedia stuff spamming up the top of all the serps is redundant?
     
    BuenosAires, Feb 20, 2007 IP