
Wikipedia Bitcoin Statistics - vinchuco
http://stats.grok.se/en/latest90/Bitcoin
======
danuker
[http://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=bitcoin#q=bitcoin&dat...](http://www.google.com/trends/explore?q=bitcoin#q=bitcoin&date=today%201-m&cmpt=q&tz=)

Meh. Anomaly or scrapers.

~~~
vinchuco
I have followed this regularly (it used to follow price more closely). This
does seem unusual.

Interestingly: MIT BitcoinExpo was March 07-08

------
contingencies
Article creator here: wow, I had no idea it was that popular!

~~~
ericfontaine
I see that your website has a link to
[http://stani.sh/pratyeka](http://stani.sh/pratyeka), which is the same
username as "Pratyeka" who created this _529 byte stub_ for bitcoin on 8 March
2009:

    
    
      Bitcoin is an open source peer-to-peer electronic cash system developed by Satoshi Nakamoto that's completely P2P|decentralized, with no central server or trusted parties. Users hold the cryptography|crypto keys to their own money and transact directly with each other, with the help of the network to check for double-spending.
    

But the stub article did not meet wikipedia's standards as it lacked
references to 3rd party sources, so was marked for deletion July ~10, 2010
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=342.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=342.0)
and officially deleted July ~31, 2010
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=652.0)
and was only restored after the bitcoin community rewrote it fully in a manner
deemed sufficient by the wikipedia community.

And for the entire history, you are only responsible for 0.19% of edits to
that page, according to
[https://tools.wmflabs.org/usersearch/usersearch.py?name=Prat...](https://tools.wmflabs.org/usersearch/usersearch.py?name=Pratyeka&page=Bitcoin&server=enwiki&max=100)

Every little wikipedia stub and edit is important, but sorry I was off-put by
you entrance displaying the mantle "Article creator here".

~~~
contingencies
Yes! Creation in the context of Wikipedia clearly means creation. FYI your
research missed the fact that I was a part of the argument for undeleting /
saving it from deletion twice, IIRC.

~~~
ericfontaine
Yes, so what? So were many others. But you don't see everybody who created a
wikipedia article make ego-boosting comments on HN whenever their article is
mentioned. Nor do you see everyone involved in nurturing bitcoin comment on HN
whenever bitcoin is mentioned.

Honestly, the reason I did research was I was hoping you were one of the cool
people I used to chat with on the early days of bitcoin forums. I was curious
to read your early comments and eager to ask you about your experience or how
you first came across bitcoin. But all I found by searching for you username
on bitcointalk was someone else's post "Paying homage to Pratyeka of Wikipedia
for Bitcoin's inclusion."
[https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99437.0](https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=99437.0)
featuring this bravado quote from your wikipedia profile of "particular
contributions that your proud of":

 _" I argued bitterly for the restoration of the Bitcoin article from the evil
hands of the deletionists, and have since been vindicated in my judgement as
Bitcoin's rise to prominence has continued."_

Your quote sounds like it is from a Middle Earth fantasy epic, and is just
asking to be signed something like:

 _" -First Knight Pratyeka 'The Clairvoyant' of Wikipedia, The Creator of the
Bitcoin Article, and The Protector of the defenseless Bitcoin community from
the Void of Obscurity, The Hero entrusted with the Power of Wiki-Influence who
rose during The Challenging Times and singlehandedly defeated the onslaught of
The Deletionists."_

I'm exaggerating, deliberately to give you an idea of what impression your
comment and wiki profile imparts on others. I know many of us all like to
speak like that on the internet in good humor, but after I combined your wiki
profile quote with your HN comment, the picture of you in my head was another
internet personality with a little too much ego that needs to be dampened. I'm
imagining that in real life when you overhear strangers in public talk about
bitcoin, you approach them to tell them that you created the bitcoin article.

Your comment feels just like the cliché first comment phenomenon that typical
on sites like youtube. It offers nothing of substance or insight itself. Yes,
everyone knows about the butterfly effect and how little things do make a
difference. But this means every little bitcoin transaction, every little
bitcoin bug report, every little bitcoin commit, every time someone explained
bitcoin to their friends, everybody who made a bitcoin for ______ service, and
every little anonymous wiki edit deserves some bit of credit for bitcoin's
rise. And the blunt reality is that the reason the wikipedia article was
reinstated was because these little interactions gradually increased the
market price, causing more news sites started taking notice, so there were
more 3rd party sources which is precisely what the article needed to survive.
That was due to everyone's little contributions. And regarding your initial
"creation", had you not made the initial stub, someone else would have made it
a couple weeks later.

The good feeling of advancing human knowledge and understanding by creating
and editing Wikipedia articles should be the reward itself. Posting on
internet forums that you were the "first" just seems like your seeking
attention or praise. And even worse, as another commentator kiro said earlier,
your comment sounds like you take credit for the whole Wikipedia Bitcoin
article. Regardless of the truth that factually and technically you did indeed
"create" the initial stub, did a few edits, and argued to keep the article up,
a humbler comment that offered insight wouldn't have provoked such a strong
negative reaction.

Regardless, I am appreciative of Wikipedians like you for contributing and
defending against The Deletionists.

~~~
contingencies
Yes. I stopped contributing to the article because it turned in to this sort
of thing, and had achieved my immediate purpose of making it exist and stay
existing. I suggest you also learn to manage your time, as your posts while
impressive and reasonable do not represent a healthy degree of interest to
display in a passing piece of minutiae. Sarcasm can be hard to pick up, but at
least you got the RPG/fantasy reference. :)

~~~
ericfontaine
:)

It is not minutiae when someone phrases their posts in a manner that may imply
they're taking credit for other people's work.

I didn't mind spending a few minutes because I respect all wikipedians who
created and maintained the bitcoin article.

I wanted to help you understand, but now see it is futile. I would hope that
the Wikipedia personality whose name is the abbreviation of the enlightened
Pratyekabuddha ("a lone buddha", "a buddha on their own" or "a private buddha"
[1]) would understand, but apparently I am talking to the personality
"contingencies".

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratyekabuddha](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratyekabuddha)

------
_xander
Wow, those 'top' statistics are quite depressing. Mainly films, celebrities,
conspiracies, war, death and missing airplanes.

------
alextingle
Why?

------
codewithcheese
Is this implying that its popularity exploded on the 7th?

~~~
vinchuco
Nope.

