Does google favour WIkipedia?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
11 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Does google favour WIkipedia?

Oliver Keyes-4
The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study

Thought people might find it interesting :)

--
Oliver Keyes
Community Liaison, Product Development
Wikimedia Foundation
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Richard Symonds-3
Thanks for this, Oliver - really helpful!

Richard Symonds
Office&  Development Manager
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0992
--
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Charitable Company
Registered in England and Wales, No: 6741827. Charity No:1144513 Office: 4th Floor, Development House,  56-64 Leonard Street,
London EC2A 4LT.
Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit
organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for
its contents.


On 20/03/2012 17:07, Oliver Keyes wrote:
> The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
> http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study
>
> Thought people might find it interesting :)
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Oliver Keyes-4
> The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
> http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study
>
> Thought people might find it interesting :)

No question that we are a center of attention for Google. I've noticed
that when I create a new article, it often comes up as the first hit on
Google for the subject within 5 minutes. There is no way such positioning
is based on external links to the article.

Fred



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Pedro Sanchez-2
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
>> http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study
>>
>> Thought people might find it interesting :)
>
> No question that we are a center of attention for Google. I've noticed
> that when I create a new article, it often comes up as the first hit on
> Google for the subject within 5 minutes. There is no way such positioning
> is based on external links to the article.
>
> Fred

Of course not. Google positioning is not merely a count of external
links to a page.

Pedro Sánchez
http://drini.mx
@combinatorica

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Andrew Gray-3
In reply to this post by Fred Bauder-2
On 20 March 2012 17:20, Fred Bauder <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
>> http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study
>>
>> Thought people might find it interesting :)
>
> No question that we are a center of attention for Google. I've noticed
> that when I create a new article, it often comes up as the first hit on
> Google for the subject within 5 minutes. There is no way such positioning
> is based on external links to the article.

I believe Google take articles directly from the newpages feed. As to
why they're the first hit, I suspect it's more to do with the way that
our new articles tend to be on highly specific topics, and are very
often the only page on the internet *specifically* about that thing...

(The SEO people are correct that Wikipedia has a high Google ranking,
and correct that this is something of an odd skew on Google's part.
What always amuses me is the recurrent belief that Wikipedia
deliberately tries to do this, that we're bribing Google or setting up
carefully-constructed semantic traps in our articles or something -
the fact that it's not a cunning ploy on our part is completely
inconceivable to someone who approaches everything from this
perspective.)

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Tom Morris-5
On 20 March 2012 18:24, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:
> (The SEO people are correct that Wikipedia has a high Google ranking,
> and correct that this is something of an odd skew on Google's part.
> What always amuses me is the recurrent belief that Wikipedia
> deliberately tries to do this, that we're bribing Google or setting up
> carefully-constructed semantic traps in our articles or something -
> the fact that it's not a cunning ploy on our part is completely
> inconceivable to someone who approaches everything from this
> perspective.)
>

Perhaps they honestly believe that their keyword-primed advertorial
page is actually more useful than a Wikipedia page and are astounded
that Google might have the temerity to disagree. ;-)

--
Tom Morris
<http://tommorris.org/>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

David Gerard-2
On 20 March 2012 18:39, Tom Morris <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 20 March 2012 18:24, Andrew Gray <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> (The SEO people are correct that Wikipedia has a high Google ranking,
>> and correct that this is something of an odd skew on Google's part.
>> What always amuses me is the recurrent belief that Wikipedia
>> deliberately tries to do this, that we're bribing Google or setting up
>> carefully-constructed semantic traps in our articles or something -
>> the fact that it's not a cunning ploy on our part is completely
>> inconceivable to someone who approaches everything from this
>> perspective.)

> Perhaps they honestly believe that their keyword-primed advertorial
> page is actually more useful than a Wikipedia page and are astounded
> that Google might have the temerity to disagree. ;-)


You just don't understand how vitally important to the Web it really
is that the first party (us) ignore the second party (the readers) so
that a third party (SEO spammers^Wspecialists) can get in good with a
fourth party (Google).

[citation needed]


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Fred Bauder-2
In reply to this post by Tom Morris-5

>
> Perhaps they honestly believe that their keyword-primed advertorial
> page is actually more useful than a Wikipedia page and are astounded
> that Google might have the temerity to disagree. ;-)
>
> --
> Tom Morris
> <http://tommorris.org/>

We can't create a new page based on a press release or an advertisement.
Usually a new page results from news, journal articles, or news about
journal articles. There will be links to the sources. This is not a
difficult pattern to program into an algorithm.

Fred


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

geni
In reply to this post by Oliver Keyes-4
On 20 March 2012 17:07, Oliver Keyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The answer, evidently, is "not as much as Bing" -
> http://searchenginewatch.com/article/2161910/Bing-Not-Google-Favors-Wikipedia-More-Often-in-Search-Results-Study
>
> Thought people might find it interesting :)
>

Wikipedia has typicaly ranked higher in the results of non google
search engines for at least 4 years. The reason for this is unknown
and I haven't even heard any viable theories.

--
geni

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

MZMcBride-2
In reply to this post by Fred Bauder-2
Fred Bauder wrote:
>> Perhaps they honestly believe that their keyword-primed advertorial
>> page is actually more useful than a Wikipedia page and are astounded
>> that Google might have the temerity to disagree. ;-)
>
> We can't create a new page based on a press release or an advertisement.
> Usually a new page results from news, journal articles, or news about
> journal articles. There will be links to the sources. This is not a
> difficult pattern to program into an algorithm.

We can't? It happens every single day on Wikimedia wikis and the articles
generally sit around for weeks, if not months or years. I'm not sure what
you're talking about.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Does google favour WIkipedia?

Fred Bauder-2
> Fred Bauder wrote:
>>> Perhaps they honestly believe that their keyword-primed advertorial
>>> page is actually more useful than a Wikipedia page and are astounded
>>> that Google might have the temerity to disagree. ;-)
>>
>> We can't create a new page based on a press release or an
>> advertisement.
>> Usually a new page results from news, journal articles, or news about
>> journal articles. There will be links to the sources. This is not a
>> difficult pattern to program into an algorithm.
>
> We can't? It happens every single day on Wikimedia wikis and the articles
> generally sit around for weeks, if not months or years. I'm not sure what
> you're talking about.
>
> MZMcBride

I speak of the enforceable requirement that information in Wikipedia come
from a reliable published source.

Fred



_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l