Home > Metablogging > Wikipedia hits the top ten

Wikipedia hits the top ten

November 14th, 2006

For the first time in its history, Wikipedia is #10 in Alexa’s daily Traffic Rank though not in the official top 10.

Looking at the top 10 confirms a point Eszter Hargittai at CT makes about the d danger of assuming that everyone has more or less the same way of using the Internet, with modest lags between early and late adopters of innovation. The list includes some Web 2.0 style entries (Orkut, YouTube and MySpace), a couple of Microsoft sites, three Asian portals and of course Google. Nothing too surprising to me there. But right at the top is Yahoo, a site I used to visit quite a bit in the mid-90s, but haven’t been to for ages.

Going back is a journey into the Cambrian Era of the Internet. There’s the same generic portal, and ancient survivors like Geocities. There’s even reminders of Yahoo’s original goal of manually cataloguing the Internet. What there isn’t, for me, is anything to distinguish this from a thousand other portals offering newsfeeds, email accounts and so on.

But obviously, Yahoo is doing something massively right, even if I can’t see it.

Categories: Metablogging Tags:
  1. November 15th, 2006 at 01:19 | #1

    I think what Yahoo did right was to be in near the beginning. So many people set themselves up with Yahoo mail accounts etc that they have stayed. The only (and crucial) difference is brand recognition, not the basic products on offer.

    Certainly most of the searches that come to my site are from Google, not Yahoo.

    The only Yahoo product I use by choice is Flickr (I also use Yahoo! Groups because some activists are still living in 2001 and think it is a great new technology, so I am forced to use it to find out what is going on)

  2. November 15th, 2006 at 07:09 | #2

    I don’t understand why Yahoo is still #1 either. I occasionally go there to look at a chart like AUD/USD, commodity prices etc, and I still have an old @yahoo.com address which I check once a month, but I google 50 times a day!

  3. November 15th, 2006 at 08:02 | #3


    Your assumption that the market is the correct judge of Yahoos utility, rather than you, is indeed a humble admission. Are there any other areas where you can’t understand why the market winner is popular but accept the verdict as valid none the less? When (and how) would you ever decide that your own “insight” is superior?


    p.s. I never use Yahoo. I think Wikipedia and Google are brilliant. And I even pay the later several thousand dollars per annum.

  4. November 15th, 2006 at 08:19 | #4

    Yahoo has moderated user groups (web based mailing lists). Some have thousands of users. Now these groups are mainly web based. I don’t know the figures but I think that Majordomo (email based lists) have more users than Yahoo. I don’t know of a way of measuring internet activity that includes non-webbased protocols such as nntp, irc, and mailing lists.

  5. Stewart Kelly
    November 15th, 2006 at 12:45 | #5

    Like John I use both Wikipedia and Google daily, they’re both awesome. I really should send a donation Wikipedias way 🙂 No idea though why Yahoo is still number one.

  6. November 15th, 2006 at 13:27 | #6

    Yahoo are the company who recently provided the Chinese government with information about certain users, which resulted in their arrest and imprisonment.

    Likewise, Google censor content for Chinese users which eliminates certain embarrassing pieces of information, such as the massacre in Tiananmen square. A whole generation of Chinese are now growing up with that piece of history erased.

    People of conscience should boycott these products.

  7. November 15th, 2006 at 15:52 | #7

    Wikipedia was recently blacklisted in China. Jim Wales refused to censor certain wikipedia articles so the chinese government blocked the entire site.


  8. November 15th, 2006 at 20:13 | #8

    That’s good news, Terje.

  9. November 16th, 2006 at 20:40 | #9


    I presume you mean the first bit is bad news and the second bit is good news.


Comments are closed.