Go ahead type in any single letter of the alphabet into a google search box. Think it highlights an algorithmic bias that wikipedia is listed top 10 for every one. Sure no one really searches for the “a” but when you play on the fringe you learn things about how an algo works. Still not convinced try the numbers 0-10 … still think I’m not onto something … try it with [aa] and go to [zz] the only one wikipedia doesn’t rank for are [ee] and [tt]. Want more proof try [00] or [11] or [22] or just make up some 3 digit number like [897] or [396] … sure the wiki should absolutely be ranking for all those terms … right
Perhaps I should just search using Wikipedia. Cut out the middle man
It's not that there's anything in it for G, it's just their algorithm. For a lot of search phrases, I think G's link weighted algorithm turns up much crappier results than Yahoo and MSN/Live.
It's not that there's anything in it for G, it's just their algorithm. For a lot of search phrases, I think G's link weighted algorithm turns up much crappier results than Yahoo and MSN/Live.
Thanks for the heads up Nick. But the G is the one that makes all the money from the crap
Wikipedia has Google Trust that's why whenever you search for some keywords the Wiki is on top... And Wikipedia has the almost complete compilation of word meanings etc...
Also there are plenty of contributors in Wikipedia sites (lots of editors)...Which gives or contributes all necessary informations for the site(wikipedia) ...