It’s just data


Rafe Colburn: Rogers Cadenhead looks at Dave Winer’s long bet with New York Times executive Martin Nisenholtz on whether blogs or the Times would reign supreme by 2007. The winner: none of the above. Wikipedia outranks them both.

Perhaps the requirement to cite sources trumps the requirement to provide credentials.

Incidentally, this is why I have very little faith in Google’s “Knol” project.

Posted by Bob Aman at

There’s an increasingly large fraction of searches for which it is easier to skip Google altogether and go directly to Wikipedia - or at most using Google as a semantic router:  prepending “wikipedia” to a search string in the Firefox address bar effectively uses Google to route to a specific entry; e.g., “wikipedia ruby”, etc.

I began noticing some time ago that the Wikipedia entry would be in the number one search result, or at least in the top two or three.  The references section of the Wikipedia entry is often better than anything in the Google search results - which says something about the power of human input.

Posted by Jeffrey Winter at

This shouldn’t be surprising: Wikipedia articles are designed to have stable identities, so they’re perfect for accruing PageRank. Given that 4 of the 5 “top stories” are broad, complex phenomena rather then simple events, it isn’t surprising that Google finds it easier to select a relevant Wikipedia article (which has been designed to summarize topics under a stable URL) than a relevant collection of NYT articles or blog posts. It doesn’t follow, of course, that being well-suited to Google’s algorithms can be equated with quality.

Posted by Ryan Shaw at

[from edcrypt] Sam Ruby: Truthiness

“Perhaps the requirement to cite sources trumps the requirement to provide credentials.”...

Excerpt from at

Add your comment