
Wikipedia has a Google search monopoly and this must STOP - domnuprofesor
Why is it that if I search for World War II for example the first hits are always Wikipedia?<p>Google pushes Wikipedia systematically on top without merit I would argue. I also suspect that Google does not run Wikipedia through their ranking algorithm.<p>Any opinions and insights would be welcome.
======
reportgunner
Bro first hits are always ads. I want ads to be removed and wikipedia to be
first.

I don't want to have 7 search bars for each website, I want to write
"dementia" and have a wikipedia link to dementia explanation come up as the
first result.

We can have lengthy discussions about what Google _should_ do but they don't
really care about the outcome.

~~~
DanBC
> I want to write "dementia" and have a wikipedia link to dementia explanation
> come up as the first result.
    
    
        dementia wikipedia
    

...will work. If you're using DDG you can type

    
    
        !w dementia
    

...and it'll take you direct to the Wikipedia page.

------
jedberg
Wikipedia has a pagerank of 8, which means a lot of people link back to it.
Google only has a PR of 9 (as does reddit). Almost no site has a PR of 10. So
wikipedia is considered pretty authoritative on a lot of stuff.

~~~
domnuprofesor
Wikipedia was teleported to Google first page results from its inception. This
helped a lot in building its PR.

------
quirkafleeg3
If I'm looking for general information about a subject, I want Wikipedia to be
first

~~~
domnuprofesor
What you want is a different matter than what Google should list first in the
search results.

~~~
reportgunner
OP can you elaborate on what _" should"_ be the first in the search result ?

~~~
domnuprofesor
wikipedia was given special treatment by google and this should have never
happened. the first search result should be the one that scores highest in the
ranking algorithm without partiality.

------
visarga
On the other hand many people expect Wikipedia to be the first hit on lots of
topics.

~~~
domnuprofesor
Google should provide the relevant results not what people expect.

~~~
mehhh
Wikipedia is a fairly reliable, even handed source on most subjects. A general
search engine will always rank it highly...

~~~
domnuprofesor
Why not then list britannica.com or encyclopedia.com first? Britannica must be
by all standards more reliable than Wikipedia. You cannot get around the fact
that Wikipedia gets special treatment from Google.

~~~
reportgunner
Britannica is not free and not a non-profit. Wikipedia is completely free and
is a non-profit. Also I got 3 popups 10 seconds after arriving to the page, no
thanks !

I would argue that google got more popular thanks to Wikipedia and Wikipedia
became widely used thanks to Google.

~~~
domnuprofesor
so, not free websites or non-profit should count in the search ranking? This
is an outrageous argument and I hope you can see how bad of an argument that
is.

[https://www.britannica.com/event/World-War-
II](https://www.britannica.com/event/World-War-II) has one pop-up (can be
easily blocked) and quality content.

I agree with "I would argue that google got more popular thanks to Wikipedia
and Wikipedia became widely used thanks to Google."

~~~
reportgunner
_> so, not free websites or non-profit should count in the search ranking?_

No. Free websites are generally more relevant since you don't have to pay any
money to view content.

Also it is evident that you know of britannica existence if you have purchased
a membership. Why use google to search for articles on a site you subscribe to
?

I still don't understand why you posted this thread ? Whom should do what to
fix this ?

~~~
domnuprofesor
I know of Britannica from two decades now. Britannica has free quality content
online besides the paid premium. Google should rank that content accordingly.

It seems you don't see the big picture here. Google artificially positioned
Wikipedia in the top just because they liked the project and resonated with
their values.

~~~
reportgunner
_> It seems you don't see the big picture here._

I see and I agree with you 100% on that statement. What I don't see is what
was the expectations behind submitting your post. Do you want us to stop using
wikipedia now ? Or stop using google ? Should we sign a petition to google to
change this ?

~~~
domnuprofesor
Now I get you. My expectation would be that this post would be heard by Google
and Google would make the appropriate changes: first and foremost, position
Wikipedia on its proper place in the search results and give other websites a
fair game.

