Talk:List of most visited websites/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia must be in the 7th place?

I don´t really understand why some sites are discriminated for country/language (like Amazon or Yahoo) and Wikipedia it´s not discriminated in the same way (all languages access are considered part of the same thing, and all access are counted in the same place, resulting in a 7th place for Wikipedia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.191.133.167 (talk) 21:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia uses the same web address for its various language versions of the site, while Yahoo and Amazon use different web addresses for its various language sites, therefore are counted separately. Frmorrison (talk) 14:41, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Could someone please sort this out?

Not only the ranking of website is wrong but it is also so intentionally. I identified at least one post that maliciously use wikipedia to increase the traffic on specific websites.

Have a look at this diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_most_popular_websites&diff=532018164&oldid=531993743

For instance, Babylon.com has never been ranked 28. There is presumably more of those.

Could someone please fix or get rid of this page?

Thanks.

Wrong Ranking

The ranking of the pages is wrong, it has not been updated in a month — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.218.35.109 (talk) 21:36, 20 October 2013 (UTC)


Pointless?

Given the wildly inaccurate nature of the ranking measures in use for this list, isn't this page largely pointless? --gilgongo (talk) 22:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder.

Can I see most popular websites in the past? For example,in 2007,2008 and 2009.Manzzzz(talk) 14:13, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello Manzzzz. This article is currently lacking that information, but I think such information would be an important subject for this article to include. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 12:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

similarweb ranking

I wonder if we should include the similarweb ranking in this list. It's a web measurement firm from Israel competing with Alexa’s stronghold in web rankings (techcrunch, thenextweb). I'd expect their data to be as questionable as Alexa's, but the comparison with similarweb global top100 may make this clearer and be interesting. --Atlasowa (talk) 14:47, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Extended content
{{{1}}}
Seems reasonable to me. Including SimilarWeb's rankings would help the article remain neutral. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 14:33, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
OK, this whole list article is a spammers paradise, it's impossible to maintain/update adequately and every second day some IP-user changes 1 or 2 other spamlinks on the list. I'm giving up and kicking this off my watchlist. I'd recommend removing "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it." and putting this article under pending changes or half protection, but frankly this is a lost cause and not worth it. --Atlasowa (talk) 14:48, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
I have semi-protected the page after an inspection of the edit history. I have also removed the incomplete notice, as suggested. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 17:41, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for responding, Arbitrarily0, and sorry for venting. The problem is: Alexa ranking, the google ranking and SimilarWeb's ranking changes - daily? Updating a Top 100 wikitable is not a quick thing to do (unless there is some method i don't know) - I looked at this for including SimilarWeb in the table. Can someone recommend a good updating method and a reasonable updating rhythm? --Atlasowa (talk) 08:01, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
Adding SimilarWeb rankings is a good idea, here is the list Top 100 sites. Normally only the top 50 is shown, but after one registers there is a free demo to see the top 100. Frmorrison (talk) 16:03, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia/Google Ad Planner

I wonder why Wikipedia has an entry in the Google ad planner list?--Mideal (talk) 12:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

incorrect information

www.vk.com is NOT a video game review website. It is the largest social networking site in Russia and has nothing to do with video game reviews.

Edit request on 10 July 2013

Please change VKontakte from 'videogame reviews' to 'social networking'. It is a social networking site similar to facebook that is popular in the former soviet union. source: vk.com 84.82.94.237 (talk) 14:24, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Done 786b6364 (talk) 17:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 December 2013

Please, change the type of Universo Online Site from "Search" to "Portal". Universo Online is a huge portal from Brazil. Bernardo Silva (talk) 00:49, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable. Done, thanks. Adrian J. Hunter(talk•contribs) 03:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I have done it for you this time, but Adrian please change |answered=no to |answered=y when completing a request in the future to remove it from the list of requests needing assistance. Thank you. Technical 13 (talk) 04:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2014

The type provided for Amazon.com in the table should be changed from "Microblogging / Instant Messaging / Social Media" to "Commerce", for general accuracy as well as consistency with the other Amazon sites. 121.98.124.75 (talk) 12:14, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. You're going to have to be more specific. You are probably also going to need to offer some reliable source. — {{U|Technical 13}} (t • e • c) 13:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Your response is a bit confusing - my proposed change follows exactly the format requested, and an adequate source for this change is the Wikipedia article for Amazon.com itself. The only way to be more specific is to go directly to the markup code: Please change
|-
| [[Amazon.com]]
| amazon.com
| 12
| 6,183,107
| 15
| Microblogging / Instant Messaging / Social Media
to
|-
| [[Amazon.com]]
| amazon.com
| 12
| 6,183,107
| 15
| Commerce
121.98.124.75 (talk) 03:39, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Actually, there are a number of mis-matched site types; the problem appears to have arisen with this change: [1][2]. The best approach might be to revert and then apply the ranking update more carefully.121.98.124.75 (talk) 03:53, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
Done Good catch, thanks. Since no ref was given, I simply reverted that edit. Sam Sailor Sing 20:55, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2014

Please change xnxx.com from position 99 because according to Alexa XNXX.com is 101 and ThemeForest.net is 99.

Source:

|- | Xnxx | xnxx.com | 99 | | Pornography |-

|- | ThemeForest | themeforest.net | 99 | | E-Commerce |-

Ivorpad (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

 Not done - as the column clearly states - Alexa traffic rank June 2014
When Alexa issue their July 2014 rankings we will update the entire list, but not until then, as all entries need to use the same base date. - Arjayay (talk) 18:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Original Research

This article claims in its body to be original research; the ranking is a combination of several metrics in a totally undocumented way. It does not reflect directly the data gathered from any of the sources listed. It is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Either the list should directly reflect an external secondary source, or it should be removed. Gorman (talk) 22:08, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Currently, the list is Alexa's top 100 of June 2014. (Plus for 18 entries the Ad Planner stats.) It's not original research. It needs to be slightly rewritten and updated to show the present stats instead of those of June, and the article needs to be moved to reflect that it shows the popularity according to Alexa; List of most popular websites by Alexa traffic rank or whatever. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 06:10, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2014

bp-b.blogspot.com instead of bp.blogspot.com 103.6.156.173 (talk) 07:39, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: That website is someone elses by the looks of it so not done. –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2014

NetEase website (163.com) provides News and Online Games too, besides Search. Chenxuancui (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Not done: Not a popular website, Cheers, –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Done:: 163.com is a top 100 site, so I added Portal to its description. Frmorrison (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Show if server is IPv6 or not

Hello, I've got an idea about trying to make more sites IPv6. And that is to show if the site is 4/6 in a column. Maybe even an automated script showing all addresses in future on all wikipedia but we'll have to start somewhere. I could check all the url's in list of most popular websites. Tell me what you think about it. Thanks Dammew (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

While it may be nice to know is a server uses IPv6, it doesn't really have a place on a list of the most popular websites. Frmorrison (talk) 03:00, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2015

AdobeVideos

| Adobevideos.com | 3 | 3 | Video sharing |- Balu 1411 (talk) 08:33, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: No wiki page, Alexa ranking is 3 million. http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/adobevideos.com Cannolis (talk) 11:43, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

URL in final row should be indiatimes.com, not in.google.com

The final entry in the table is for India Times, but the URL is for Google's India page.The correct URL is indiatimes.com. ( http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/indiatimes.com ) Untorqued (talk) 03:50, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Multiple listings

Why does Google have separate listings for Google Japan, Google India, etc. but Wikipedia does not have separate listings for the English Wikipedia, German Wikipedia, etc. Shouldn't we use the same rules for all sites on the list? --Guy Macon (talk) 17:57, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Was this not already answered here? 80.1.219.140 (talk) 00:04, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
That answer ("Wikipedia uses the same web address for its various language versions of the site, while Yahoo and Amazon use different web addresses for its various language sites, therefore are counted separately") is factually incorrect. yahoo.co.jp and yahoo.com are different web addresses. ja.wikipedia.org and en.wikipedia.org. are different web addresses. Each leads to a different website. Whether different-language websites controlled by the same organization are listed separately should not depend on trivial differences in the URL naming scheme. BTW, http://www.wikipedia.jp is also the web address for the Japanese Wikipedia. Try it! --Guy Macon (talk) 02:22, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
We, as editors, do not decide which websites are the most popular, we use 3rd party sources. If the 3rd party sources only list one website, wikipedia.org, then that means only one website is is going to be listed. --Frmorrison (talk) 12:44, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Which third party source? http://www.alexa.com/topsites splits Google into Google.com, Google.co.in, Google.co.jp, and Google.de, and puts Google.com at #1. http://www.similarweb.com/global splits Google into Google.com, Google.com.br, Google.co.in, Google.fr, Google.co.uk, Google.es, Google.com.tr, Google.pl, Google.ru Google.it, Google.ca, Google.co.jp, Google.com.mx, Google.com.ar and puts Google.com at #2. We are using sources that compare apples and oranges. --Guy Macon (talk) 13:11, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
3rd party sources can be found by clicking on the bracketed numbers, such as [1], [2]; this ranks website according to Alexa and then shows the differing rankings from Similarweb. Both of these sources list Google with its separate sites and Wikipedia as one site. If those sources rank Wikipedia into different websites, then this list should be updated. However, unless the sources change their ranking systems, Wikipedia will remain ranked as one website. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
My understanding is Wikipedia ends with .org and Google ends with .com .co.uk etc as seen here so the one we are currently on is the English language version of Wikipedia with starts in en. and if you look at say the Italian version it starts with it. but all are under the same domain which is .org as opposed to Google which ends with different domains for their language versions. If you think about it this is not www.Wikipedia.en (also the Japanese example used is not hosted on .jp it just redirects to .org) 80.1.219.140 (talk) 18:20, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Re: "all are under the same domain which is .org as opposed to Google which ends with different domains for their language versions" you are mistaken as to the meaning of the phrase "domain". See Domain name and Fully qualified domain name. en.wikipedia.org is a domain name. jp.wikipedia.org is a different domain name. www.yahoo.com is a domain name. yahoo.co.jp is a different domain name. Also a domain name that redirects to another domain name is still a domain name, as is one that hosts a web server, an email server, or nothing at all. The content doesn't change whether it is a domain name or not. Thus www.yahoo.com and yahoo.com are different domain names with the non-www domain name redirecting to the www domain name. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
See here and you will find Wikipedia uses subdomains which are a part of the main domain which is .org as opposed to Google which does not use subdomains. 80.1.219.140 (talk) 18:54, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I understand how the domain name system works. I was a minor contributor to the original DNS design discussions. What you have not explained is why you think that this is significant. --Guy Macon (talk) 20:26, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Well the sources used might be tracking the hits to the websites that way. 80.1.219.140 (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
If you read the article it says "Only the site's highest-level domain is recorded, aggregating any subdomains." so I would advise you find sites that do not track them that way if it's such an issue. 80.1.219.140 (talk) 14:42, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

You need to differentiate between TLD URLs and websites. A piece of text should be added explaining situations where one website operates under different addresses. If Facebook decided to move only your personal profile editing pages to "facebook.me", would people seriously treat it as a separate website in real life? Whatsbrocolli (talk) 19:10, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 October 2015

Dailymotion is a French company and not a US one, as specified in the table.

Source : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dailymotion

81.67.197.104 (talk) 08:02, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for pointing that out

Need Update

As per Alexa Ranking Youtube.com take over the Facebook.com and in 2nd place. Kindly update the Details as soon as possible and frequently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenifersoflous (talk • contribs) 13:02, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Someone else updated it a few weeks ago, but it was done incorrectly so it should be good now. It is very tedious to update this list and I have done it every 4-6 months the last two years. If you think it should be updated more frequently, you are welcome to check the references and update it. --Frmorrison (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Is Google a search engine?

Yes, obviously. But also the domain is used for so much more e.g. play.google.com mail.google.com analytics.google.com so isn't calling it just a search engine a generalisation that doesn't really cover its full traffic? Rayman60 (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

You are right, it is more than search, I will change it. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
I've reflected this in Google's other regional sites. Matt.syl (talk) 02:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Censored?

According to an NPR program, Under the Influence, on May 7, 2016, pornography sites are in the top 5.64.53.191.77 (talk) 11:59, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

You can check the sources for information, such as Alexa so this page is repeating what is shown there. It is unlikely Alexa is censoring the top 100. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Shouldn't Pornhub have a Canadian flag?

I'm pretty shocked that Pornhub, which is #66 on the list is listed the U.S. as the principal country. The website is based and was created in Montreal, Quebec. That needs to change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BD1A:1BE0:DD8B:1332:DB3E:7D1 (talk) 13:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

I changed the flag to Canada. Thanks for checking. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Should every use of certain key words be linked?

For many words, such as Portal, only the first instance in the table is linked. Should every instance of these words be links back to the relevant wiki pages? Ziphit (talk) 04:14, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

No, only the first time should Portal be wiki linked. --Frmorrison (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 March 2017

37.236.190.56 (talk) 19:51, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Not done: as you have not requested a change.
Please request your change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 March 2017

List of most popular websites: Change "Samsung" Website's type description from "Disney Portal" to "Technology" (along with link to "Technology" Wikipedia page) - The Samsung website is that of a technology provider (see "samsung.com") and has no relation to Disney. 101.53.210.35 (talk) 07:38, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

 Done Thanks — IVORK Discuss 10:10, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

June update

Dear editors. Here is june, but list is of April 3, 2017. Please, could You update this list to the june version? Thank You! Cassa342 (talk) 08:49, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 July 2017

In the Chart, Google India and Reddit need to be switched according to Alexa internet, so that Google India is above Reddit. Amazon is now above Taobao. Where it was ordered Tmall, Twitter, and Google Japan, it now needs to be ordered as Twitter, Google Japan, and Tmall. next, Microsoft Live, VK, Instagram, and Sohu, instead of what it was. Thunderblood101 (talk) 23:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Preferably the direct source from Alexa internet. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:06, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2017

Ankit129 (talk) 07:39, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

AnyoneAsk.com is a best website visit : anyoneask.com

Not done: This page only lists websites with high web traffic. Gulumeemee (talk) 08:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Bias

Linked-in being described as "Professional social network" instead of just social network like all the rest 76.90.112.41 (talk) 06:11, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Article Evaluation

This article seems to contain incorrect information and prompts the user at the beginning that it needs to be updated. Therefore, it seems as though this article serves no point in giving the public the correct information about the list of most popular websites. After evaluating this article, I did not find any bias and found that the citations all lead to credible sources, however these sources are not up to date. Because of this, the article needs to be updated to provide current and accurate information.Gdeluca33 (talk) 00:37, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

You inspired me to update the list; note that the former list was correct information but it was out of date. The list is now shorter due to limited free information from Alexa. --Frmorrison (talk) 16:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 March 2018

105.137.208.104 (talk) 07:31, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: as you have not requested a change.
Please request your change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:10, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Update required

The Similarweb ranking needs to be updated. Here is its latest version [1]

The new top 10 websites should be as followed: 1 - Google 2 - Facebook 3 - Youtube 4 - Baidu 5 - Xvideos 6 - xnxx 7 - Google.co.in 8 - yahoo 9 - vk 10 - Twitter 

Marie-Hélène Doyle (talk) 15:50, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
The list was last updated over two months ago so some things will change. However, the link you included does not agree with the professional version (this can be accessed for free after creating an account) Pro list of top sites. I know the pro list is updated more frequently. This pro list has Wikipedia at #5 and Google India at #6. You can makes updates if you can access the proper page. --Frmorrison (talk) 19:12, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites

Numeric Sort on Ranking Columns — Semi-protected edit request on 3 June 2018

Change ranking columns (Alexa and SimilarWeb) to numeric sort, by changing: 

   ! ColumnName

to 

   ! data-sort-type="number" | ColumnName

Crimsoncere (talk) 02:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

 Done, thanks! ‑‑ElHef (Meep?) 03:46, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Sorting by SimilarWeb

Entries which have a "?" for their SimilarWeb ranking appear above the #1 ranked site -- Google as of June 2018 -- when the table is sorted by SimilarWeb ranking. It would probably make more sense for these entries to land at the bottom instead of at the top, but I couldn't figure out how to get this to happen Matt.syl (talk) 01:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2018

197.131.134.174 (talk) 15:55, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Saucy[talk – contribs] 04:02, 13 September 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2018

103.255.6.83 (talk) 16:54, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Danski454 (talk) 17:34, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Outdated by more than 5 months

If no one is going to update this in a timely manner (say at least every 2 months?) what’s the point of this list.... pretty sure that anybody coming here wants up to date info — if that’s not possible this should just be deleted already 2601:640:106:54D0:E58F:1AD0:EAE1:F56A (talk) 00:16, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

I updated it. --Frmorrison (talk) 23:40, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2019

93.93.223.184 (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

and the most popular Wikipedia page

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DannyS712 (talk) 22:30, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Twitch has Twitch as its domain, but it should be twitch.tv

For whatever reason Twitch is shown twice in the table, as both Site and Domain, but twitch.tv is the domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Razziabuissa (talk • contribs) 09:04, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Not Mentioning SimilarWeb Top 50 Sites

The article is supposed to show the top 50 sites as per Alexa and SimilarWeb. However, the list is actually Top 50 Alexa websites and their respective SimilarWeb ranks. The formatting of the article needs to be changed. --The9Man talk 11:33, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2020

This sentence could use some punctuation:

"Of these top websites listed, the United States has the most, followed by China. over a Over half are principally based outside of the United States." 81.103.37.86 (talk) 08:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

 Done Aasim 10:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Okezone

A website called Okezone has been included into this list since early 2019. Okezone was in red status till May 2020, when I created a page to cover this topic by translating the corresponding page from Wikipedia Indonesia. Another user - Lapablo reverted my edit, advising the topic as not relevant. I therefore directly linked the list to Wikipedia Indonesia Okezone page. Lapablo decided to remove the opportunity for any Users to create a page by making the topic black, removing the [[...]]. The article created has a number of referenced sources and appears improved from the Indonesia version, but Lapablo moved it to draft and also rejected the revised and improved version. It would appear that any website/company listed in the article List of most popular websites deserve a corresponding Wikipedia page if missing, or at least be allowed to be linked to the local Wikipedia page when/if existing Goodwillgames (talk) 13:47, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Certainly should be included in this list article. Lyndaship (talk) 14:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Update similar web ranking

Please, update Similar web ranking to actual rank. This ranking is from 2019. It will be good to have new ranking here as of 2020. Thank You. Cassa342 (talk) 07:49, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Update needed for List as of August 2020

According to Alexa rankings, many websites in this list are out of popularity. Please update to reflect this change as of August 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fri74eodo (talk • contribs) 18:19, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 September 2020

I am trying to update this list. 2600:6C64:617F:EAE3:F800:D2E9:7114:9722 (talk) 11:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

You can request specific changes here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y", citing reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 12:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Kickass Torrents

kat.cr is dead. Doesn't exist, should be removed from the list. Yomomma2k17 (talk) 11:28, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

The website was shut down last year. However, Alexa Internet, as of December 28, 2016, and SimilarWeb as of November 2016 had that website counted. I doubt those are listed today, but it was listed at those places three months ago. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
For those who are not familiar with Kickass Torrents, kat.cr was seized by the U.S. Government last year.
The Kickass Torrents status page at kastatus.com/ lists katcr.co as Kickasstorrents current primary domain, with 4 mirrors.
But I found another Kickass Torrents status page at kickass.ink/ that lists kat.how as Kickasstorrents current primary domain, with 9 mirrors.
This raises the question of whether I found fake sites, the old site with a new domain, new sites formed by the people who ran the old site, or what.
I use bittorrent a lot, but I go to legal sites that are unlikely to be shut down such as
I am not sure how Wikipedia should handle the kind of bittorrent site that keeps changing domains as the old ones get seized or blocked. Trying to keep up seems like a game of Whac-A-Mole. --Guy Macon (talk) 14:17, 22 March 2017 (UTC)

MrBeast

Mrbeast is a YouTuber in the USA he makes all sorts of challenges like Putting 100 million obeez in a backyard. Mrbeast currently has over 44.6 million subscribers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:48F8:3028:13D5:2970:F67F:67F1:7A65 (talk) 23:03, 11 October 2020 (UTC)

microsoft online?

the list has microsoft online but the external link leads to no-where and the wikipedia link doesn't mention microsoft online. Isn't it MSN.com ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toinewx (talk • contribs) 00:27, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2021

w 2600:6C40:700:1AA9:609B:1DE7:F324:CDE9 (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Pupsterlove02 talk • contribs 22:16, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 February 2021

Change "Type" entry for Chaturbate from "Live Streaming" to "Pornography".

The other pornographic cam site on this list, BongaCams, is already listed as "Pornography", and the first paragraph of the BongaCams article includes the sentence "[BongaCams] is one of the largest adult camming websites in Europe, competing with American website Chaturbate." 71.197.184.191 (talk) 00:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done Gaioa (T C L) 10:31, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2021

Some of the pages missing redirects have redirects under different names. Adding these would make it clear that they do not need new pages, as well as making it easier to use this article. Mr Shwhale (talk) 12:46, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I don't think Zhanqi TV has an article though. Volteer1 (talk) 15:43, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 13 September 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There is consensus for List of most visited websites, which includes 3 direct supports. The sole oppose vote seems to be only opposing because of using the word "the", which the nominator proposed, so I assume they would be satisfied with this title. The nominator too prefers "visited" over "popular".

As for using the word "the", only the nominator supports this, no one else. Nominator's reason for this is "flow naturally". But one vote points out that using "the" would be be against WP:CONSISTENCY. That's a policy based reason for not using "the" and it is favored by the majority anyway. (non-admin closure) VR talk 20:52, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

List of most popular websites → List of the most visited websites – I think having "the" in the title makes the title flow naturally. "Visited" is a better descriptor than "popular" since "popular" can mean many things. Interstellarity (talk) 23:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. Havelock Jones (talk) 17:23, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Support For "the" since according to english grammar rules, "the" should be used before superlative degrees.
Oppose for "visited" "Popular" is more frequently searched by readers on search engines. Uttarpradeshi (talk) 18:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC) Struck comment by block evader per WP:EVASION. Interstellarity (talk) 15:46, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose Every list article I've seen relating to this kind of topic reads "List of most...", so I can't support creating an individual exception per WP:CONSISTENCY. I did briefly look for MOS rules, but I couldn't find any indication on these topics. If someone wants to start a larger RM for this issue, be my guest. (I also prefer the current wording over the new suggestion.) Nohomersryan (talk) 19:10, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Move to List of most visited websites (without the word "the") Crossover1370 (talk | contribs) 23:27, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Support move to List of most visited websites, for consistency with other articles. I think being more literal here is better than using the word popular. LunaEatsTuna (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Support as popular does not describe well how many views it has. Popular could mean a variety of things. cookie monster 755 17:33, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Article based entirely on one source (Alexa Rankings)

As of August 2020, this article relies entirely on a single source, and has essentially become a list of what Alexa Internet considers the most popular websites. Late last year, probably with the best of intentions, User:RealFakeKim removed all SimilarWeb rankings as these were "very out of date". The article is semi-protected, so as an IP editor I cannot modify it myself, but another editor could (re)add the February 2021 Top Websites rankings as provided by SimilarWeb. An alternative, if nobody's willing to put in the effort, could be to rename this article to include the word "Alexa". It's disappointing to visit a "List of most popular websites" on Wikipedia, and then get an overview that, with the exception of internal links for the sites, is a copy of what Alexa already told me. --143.176.30.65 (talk) 10:08, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Good observation. I agree with your conclusions, there should be more sources listed than just the Alexa Internet one. Furthermore, I also question the validity of the Alexa Internet rankings; they still list the Chinese streaming site Panda.tv (similar to Twitch.tv, but mainly for a Chinese-language audience) as one of the top 50 most visited websites (currently listed at place 22), but that site was shut down in March 2019, more than two years ago. Some fans are probably still visiting that site, but since it contains only a static tombstone page, I find a bit odd that Panda.tv is listed as the 22nd most visited site in the world. For this reason, and also in general, it would be good to list at least another source (like SimilarWeb). Inloggat (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Agreed as well. It seems strange to have a page with only one source of data & no external backup or reference to it's validity. There are several sources with different ranking methods as well, less based on actual traffic (like Similarweb) yet might be valid on their own scale (i.e sites like Moz, Ahrefs, SemRush) - I think it would make sense to cite them at least, and add more dynamic data to the table from those who are updated regularly. GrowTHC (talk) 08:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate the insight, but now that I see the changed article, it seems like the original suggestion of "more sources listed" has turned into "just listing Similarweb". Is there a good way multiple sources can be combined? Otherwise, this lists just becomes a copy of website rankings from a single source (which doesn't serve a very encyclopedic purpose).
Also, pinging Inloggat and GrowTHC since this talk page conversation is a bit older. - Whisperjanes (talk) 19:26, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Hmm, looks like I answered my own question - this was before similarweb was removed, so it seems like the best solution would be to just list them both. Does anyone know the best way to do that? I'm not as good with tables on Wikipedia. - Whisperjanes (talk) 19:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
As it seems this started as a data update. I see there was a request to update in the teahouse a s well. Also this is click data, which the other sources in comments here don't have, as they rely on scrape data. Alexa has been out of date for a long while now and is being deprecated - so no reason to keep that. Imo the right source of data was selected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A10:800A:F0E6:0:C0D3:D337:59EB:316F (talk) 22:18, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi all, true - Alexa was not updated since their data itself is out of date and the engine is being shut. As far as I'm aware ATM other vendors mentioned here rely on estimations based on scraped data (There's a lot of info on the web regarding how inaccurate they are), and therefore also not listed. I will try to find more of this type of data and add to the table (not sure how still, but will start with finding data) Whisperjanes. Thanks! GrowTHC (talk) 07:54, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Whisperjanes & GrowTHC, so Alexa rankings were removed because they were out-of-date? It seems odd that we used to have two indications of popularity and then one of the biggest services on the internet was removed for being outdated? Liz Read! Talk! 05:09, 5 December 2021 (UTC)


@Whisperjanes @GrowTHC Your arguments are not based on good understanding. SimilarWeb ranking (because it's a relatively smaller firm) is calculated on pure estimated number of unique visitors. One of the reasons why SEO firms love to refer clients to them is because it is simply notorious for overestimating traffic. Alexa Rank (from one of the largest renown tech companies and has more resources) factor in for pageviews, bounce rate and time on site, etc. That means even sites with 20k monthly unique visitors can get a higher ranking than sites with over 60k based on a methodology that values the quality of views. Don't know about panda tv but if it's about pandas. It's a massive fanbase so even 10 percent eagerly rechecking the page, could explain the high rank.. Particularly when I imagine China has more internet users than the entire united States. Almost a billion. Regardless you now just made the page depending entirely on a single source yet again. SimilarWebs appears to being weirdly narrowly promoted here as what makes it so special compared to other smallish firms? The biggest issue is its top list doesn't even include Chinese sites like Alibaba (which solidly has far more visitors and sales than Ebay and Amazon combined, by multiples and even more popular than Wikipedia). That alone proves that SimilarWebs are not a complete or decent source and shouldn't even be mentioned on a place like Wikipedia as it's undeniable that they just fail to measure all global sites if it fails to mentions Alibaba as having more active visitors than EBay. And removing Alexa just hides the obvious fact that SimilarWebs is deeply flawed when it comes to making a full global list. So many famous international shopping (encrypted) Chinese sites like Alibaba for one, are completely missing in its list probably because they cannot easily measure encrypted shopping sites properly. But Alexa can. I suggest we add in both so people can see Similarweb's incompetent blind spots, and at least see a list that is not so embarrassingly lacking in so many popular global sites. O'NeilFreeDumb97 (talk) 13:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
@GrowTHC Similarweb is also criticised for overestimating visits. That is partly why so many commercial SEO firms specifically promote this particular company. Also it conflates ad visits as quality visits. As someone who has over 16 years working in IT industry. It's one of the most immoral and disgusting secrets in that SEO industry. Alexa rank is actually much fairer in that no firm can be 100 percent accurate given the complexity and size of the Internet. But it does show respectable integrity in that its algorithms refuses to add in poor quality visits and ranks accordingly. And they are not out of date but simply calculates based on past 3 months instead of real time. And what is your source claiming that ​Alexa engine is being shut down?O'NeilFreeDumb97 (talk) 14:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
NeilFreeDumb97 A. Where did you get these lies about Similarweb? Actually Similarweb is NOT known in the SEO industry, it is well rewarded though in the data & alternative data industry for being extra accurate? Why is that, since they rely on real click data. Check your sources and info before spreading fake news. They have several explanations regarding their data collection, as well as rewards for their accuracy. You must be confused with scarping tools like Semrush and such. B. The entire discussion here started due to the fact that there we serious data missing from the Alexa data set. This discussion was taken to the tea house where the edit was approved. As Alexa are now in the process of shutting down I'm not seeing how their data could have improved since the last discussion regarding this. Having said that I can try to add another column with the Alexa rank, at least until they are shut completely. GrowTHC (talk) 09:23, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Add in Alexa / SimilarWeb blindspots

SimilarWeb major flaw is that it lacks reach. Ie, Alexa unlike SimilarWeb, shows a lot of Chinese shopping sites and those sites definitely do have heaps of quality visits monthly that far exceeds even Wikipedia. Understand that country already has almost a billion internet savvy users that is 3 times the size of America's entire population.

I had noticed Alexa top list rightfully includes sites like Alibaba (which is undoubtedly def one of the most popular visited sites in the world) yet SimilarWeb seems to have a total blindspot with such sites. That shows SimilarWeb as not a wholesome source which isn't surprising given that it's a far smaller firm than Amazon with lesser resources.

Alexa should replace SimilarWeb as it is widely known as the top source of reference. Some people say it's inaccurate but those people are typically commercial SEO firms looking out for their own interests and conflating pure visits as quality visits. Do you really believe Amazon, the world's dominant technology companies, would not be a quality source? They don't have quality equipment and talent and technology? That is absurd and Alexa should not even be removed. Since it includes more popular global shopping sites in its top list that SimilarWeb clearly have a total blindspot on. O'NeilFreeDumb97 (talk) 12:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Case in point, Alibaba has 779 million active buyers on a yearly basis. Whereas EBay has only 183 million buyers. And Alibaba also has more sales than EBay and Amazon combined. Yet somehow Alibaba is not included in SimilarWeb rankings but eBay somehow made its top list. SimilarWeb obviously lacks 'true' global reach and is not a suitable source and should be removed as it is misleading. If you're an American or European website owner who wants to calculate pure unique visits on your site then SimilarWeb is suitable. But not for Wikipedia. It is dumb to say eBay has more visits than Alibaba. Yet SimilarWeb is saying just that. Alexa is probably the ONLY firm currently that has the capacity to reach out and not be so blind to global encrypted shopping sites' visits and why it is important to not omit it from Wikipedia. It should either replace the deeply flawed SimilarWeb or be mentioned additionally to it.

https://savemycent.com/alibaba-statistics/ https://smallbiztrends.com/2021/02/ebay-statistics.html O'NeilFreeDumb97 (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

O'NeilFreeDumb97 Again - If you haven't taken the time to read about each of these tools data collection, please don't spread out rumors. Alexa used to be accuarate, and collect data in a very similar way, which what made it dependable as well. If you even look at content from the SEO community you'll well know Simliarweb is not a player in that field. It's a player in the field of accurate data, in terms of business even approaching more investing communities. Interesting, in the worldwide list the have the Chinese websites, but no country division. As said - I can reinstate the alexa column as well, but still think it's more important to find more click based (or hybrid) data sources. GrowTHC (talk) 09:42, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Pratham Sachin kamble

Rainbow colours 122.173.51.59 (talk) 13:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Change 'principal country' of XVideos

Hello, as seen in this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XVideos the HQ of XVideos is in Prague, Czech Republic. I'd rather change the country in the listing to CZ as well. The same goes for xnxx.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:C23:5D1B:5600:AD11:7B25:CD91:3849 (talk) 04:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi, xvideos (& XNXX) is French, as also stated here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XVideos (Origin, not where the office is) GrowTHC (talk) 08:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@2A01:C23:5D1B:5600:AD11:7B25:CD91:3849 what 24.163.44.200 (talk) 06:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Naver and United States

Naver's principal country is shown "United States".

How was that measure? Isn't it a Korean company, hosted in Korea, written content in Korean, ~94% traffic is from Korea [1]? 🤪🪱 18:28, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! there was a line-slip in my sheet, fixed now :) GrowTHC (talk) 08:17, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Data copyrights

Hi @Numberguy6 This list is generated monthly on a public page, and is available for sharing via social networks. It's also sent to many publishers for them to share. The address of the page is: https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/ Access to the page is free, as well as to the individual websites data. Therefore I believe this list is in fact valid and made for sharing here as well. Happy to revise texts if needed, as suggested. GrowTHC (talk) 09:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

atagmesh

a word i created 

 thank you 116.87.106.186 (talk) 07:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_most_visited_websites/Archive_1&oldid=1163690410"