A massive intellectual wiki-boner

This is a navel-gazing post about an exercise in vanity searching, mainly set down as a note to myself. There: you were warned.

I did some testing using the Wikipedia stats tool to investigate how many people read my contributions.

I assume that people rarely read entire WP articles, but usually skim them. So I can’t include every article I’ve contributed. I’ve looked up daily hits for articles I’ve created:

and added articles that I totally or substantially rewrote:

So far, these total 1000 hits per day. There are three more articles that I’ve made substantial, but not majority, contributions to, and I think it would be difficult even to skim them without reading content that I’ve written, so I feel justified in including them:

These take the total over 5000 daily reads.

(Introspection gets about 750 hits per day, but I haven’t included it because my contributions to it aren’t yet substantial enough).

These stats only give  a vague estimate, because:

but over the course of a year, an appropriate ballpark figure seems to be two million reads. Naturally, these are not hits on my own opinions or research but on my neutral summaries of existing published work. That’s still pretty gratifying to say the least (hence the title of this post). The point of my involvement isn’t and shouldn’t be to get “ratings”, as shown by the fact that it’s taken years to get around to thinking about this. The articles I personally think most important in this list are the ones that get the fewest hits.

Advertisements
  1. Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: