Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

An Open Ranking of Wikipedia Pages

Posted by Soulskill on from the citation-needed dept.

vigna writes: The Laboratory for Web Algorithmics of the Università degli studi di Milano did it again: after creating the first open ranking of the World Wide Web they have put together the first entirely open ranking of Wikipedia, using Wikidata to categorize pages. The ranking is based on classic and easily explainable centrality measures or page views, and it is entirely open — all data (Wikipedia and Wikidata dumps) and all software used is publicly available. Just in case you wonder, the most important food is chocolate, the most important band are the Beatles and the most important idea is atheism.

39 comments

  1. Two out of three right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not bad.

  2. John was right by oodaloop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The Beatles really ARE more popular than Jesus.

    --
    Tic-Tac-Toe, Global Thermonuclear War, and relationships all have the same winning move.
    1. Re:John was right by amicusNYCL · · Score: 4, Informative

      No they aren't. Among men only, only Obama, Napoleon, G.W. Bush, FDR, Reagan, Shakespeare, Hitler, Washington, Churchill, Lincoln, Aristotle, Columbus, Clinton, Theodore Roosevelt, and Einstein are more popular than Jesus. Bob Dylan (21) would be the most popular musician, beating out both Michael Jackson (27) and Elvis (29). None of the Beatles are individually in the top 100 for men.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:John was right by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, but the Beatles, much like Devastator or Voltron, are far greater and more powerful when combined than the sum of their individual parts.

    3. Re:John was right by jrumney · · Score: 2

      Rank by "Page views" rather than "Harmonic centrality" (whatever that means). John Lennon is at number 122 among humans, with Jesus trailing at 123. Biggest musician seems to be Ariana Grande at number 1 (only Robin Williams is bigger than her).

    4. Re:John was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      90% of traffic to trendy Wikipedia articles are bots scraping excerpts for link/ad farm sites to try to fool search engines into believing they're legitimate sites.

    5. Re:John was right by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      you seem to confuse the members of the band for the band itself.

      nobody gives a shit about what ringo does nowadays, but they'll look up what the beatles did.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    6. Re:John was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this comment is too good for an award of the Internet, please take 4 Internets with our thanks

  3. Next story pls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Next please, this is about as boring as going to the library when I need a book.

  4. The captcha for this comment is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    glaucoma

    1. Re:The captcha for this comment is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the fuck do you think anyone would care what the captcha is, asshole?!

  5. Starlight Glimmer 2016 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Vote Starlight Glimmer for President in 2016. As the social justice candidate, Starlight invites all of America to experience true friendship for the first time. Starlight believes in an America where nobody flaunts their special talents because they have no special talents to flaunt. Free yourself and choose equality as your special talent.

  6. hmmm... by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 1

    the most important idea is atheism

    And just in case you wonder, the seventh most important idea is (or is it?)... Ice Bucket Challenge!

    1. 1. Atheism
    2. 2. Communism
    3. 3. Agnosticism
    4. 4. Homeland for the Jewish people
    5. 5. Determinism
    6. 6. Apatheism
    7. 7. Carthago delenda est
    8. 8. Ice Bucket Challenge

    Well, maybe it's not importance that we deal with...

    --
    Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    1. Re: hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like it is no more. Damn these fads go over fast!

    2. Re: hmmm... by monkeyzoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I learned a new word...
      an apatheist is someone who considers the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to their life.

    3. Re: hmmm... by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 1

      an apatheist is someone who considers the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to their life.

      Although this neologism is suspect on etymological grounds, one could only hope that this word will become more popular and overtake the various misuses or imprecise uses of "agnosticism" for example.

      For the record, "agnostic" (literally "lacking knowledge") in the traditional sense doesn't mean "I don't know" nor "I don't care," but rather is a positive philosophical belief that it is impossible to know for certain whether god(s) exist, e.g., because of the impossibility of collecting appropriate evidence or the nature of knowledge/deities/the universe/whatever.

      Or, in terms of familiar statements:

      "I believe" = theism
      "I don't believe" = (strong) atheism
      "I don't care" = apatheism
      "I don't know" = weak atheism (aka "negative" or "soft" atheism)
      "I can't know" or "No one knows" = agnosticism
      "I don't know, and I don't care" = apatheistic atheism
      "I don't give a crap, and nobody could ever know anyway" = strong agnostic apatheism

      etc.

    4. Re: hmmm... by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 1

      And of course, let's not forget the Hitchhikerian:

      "Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mindbogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God.
      "The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
      "'But,' says Man, 'the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
      "'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.
      "'Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.
      "Most leading theologians claim that this argument is a load of dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid making a small fortune when he used it as the central theme of his bestselling book, Well That about Wraps It Up for God.

    5. Re:hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it's also "importance to whom" that bothers me.

      For example, in the list of humans, Al Gore outranks Mao Zedong! I sense a strong western bias.

    6. Re: hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'd say "I believe *not*" or "I think not" is a better match for strong atheism, and "I don't think so" for weak atheism.

    7. Re: hmmm... by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 0

      an apatheist is someone who considers the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to their life.

      Although this neologism is suspect on etymological grounds, one could only hope that this word will become more popular and overtake the various misuses or imprecise uses of "agnosticism" for example.

      As a Greek and Christian i agree with you (with many reservations, but still you are much more correct). An "a-patheist" is translated from Greek as someone without ("a-") "pathos" (a word with the meanings of "strong emotion/feeling/passion", but also of -positive or negative- "experience" and even "suffering", because of "strong emotion/feeling/passion" or sin - the "-theist" neologistic part is just one more convenient but suspect on etymological grounds in this neologism case). So, logicaly (and based on Christian beliefs also), someone without "pathos" will "consider the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to their life" - and as a Christian is important for my belief (Greek Orthodox) to overcome the sinful "pathos" (that make me need Christ) and join God's "pathos" (i.e., join God).

      For the record, "agnostic" (literally "lacking knowledge") in the traditional sense doesn't mean "I don't know" nor "I don't care," but rather is a positive philosophical belief that it is impossible to know for certain whether god(s) exist, e.g., because of the impossibility of collecting appropriate evidence or the nature of knowledge/deities/the universe/whatever.

      Very problematic term this "agnostic" because it is translated from Greek as just someone without knowledge. And it is also problematic because agnostics very often mistakenly are categorized as people that don't believe in God but an agnostic may believe in God (there is belief -in God- either with or without knowledge), and most if not all Christians are agnostics to an extend (based on their "pathos", as in "experience" - of God) because God does not reveal to us fully, and does it in different ways and degree to each one.

      "I believe" = theism

      "I don't believe" = (strong) atheism

      "I don't care" = apatheism

      "I don't know" = weak atheism (aka "negative" or "soft" atheism)

      "I can't know" or "No one knows" = agnosticism

      "I don't know, and I don't care" = apatheistic atheism

      "I don't give a crap, and nobody could ever know anyway" = strong agnostic apatheism

      Hmmm... being both Greek and Christian i consider ALL terms very problematic!

      As a Christian i don't consider anyone as "a-theist" because "Theos" exist with/in everyone - but even as just a Greek, and even accepting the neologism "the-ist", "a-theist" still has a problematic meaning of, not just "not believing" but "without God" (that's what happens when "-religious- atheist" define themselves... they need God even for that!).

      Since i already mentioned the other problematic terms ("apatheist", "agnostic"), i hope more people will at least think more about those terms, like you did (regardless of your beliefs, which i don't even know, i congratulate you... for your Greek!). And if those opposing God ever need some help from us Greeks and/or Christians to define themselves, we will give it to them!

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    8. Re: hmmm... by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 0

      An "a-patheist" is translated from Greek as someone without ("a-") "pathos" (a word with the meanings of "strong emotion/feeling/passion", but also of -positive or negative- "experience" and even "suffering", because of "strong emotion/feeling/passion" or, in the case of God issues, sin - the "-theist" neologistic part is just one more convenient but suspect on etymological grounds in this neologism case). So, logicaly (and based on Christian beliefs also), someone without "pathos" will "consider the question of the existence of gods as neither meaningful nor relevant to their life" - and as a Christian is important for my belief (Greek Orthodox) to overcome the sinful "pathos" (that make me need Christ) and join God's "pathos" (i.e., join God). We Greeks use the term not only for God related issues.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
    9. Re: hmmm... by james_gnz · · Score: 1

      As a Christian i don't consider anyone as "a-theist" because "Theos" exist with/in everyone - but even as just a Greek, and even accepting the neologism "the-ist", "a-theist" still has a problematic meaning of, not just "not believing" but "without God" (that's what happens when "-religious- atheist" define themselves... they need God even for that!).

      Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't speak Greek), but doesn't "atheist" mean without gods generally, rather than just without Yahweh specifically? You wouldn't say pre-Christian Greeks who believed in the Greek pantheon were atheist?

    10. Re: hmmm... by monkeyzoo · · Score: 1

      Apatheism was the position of the Buddha regarding God:

      The Buddha said: "I do not care to know your various theories about God. What is the use of discussing all the subtle doctrines of the soul? Do good and be good. And this will take you to freedom and whatever truth there is."

      http://www.quora.com/What-is-t...

    11. Re: hmmm... by bryonak · · Score: 1

      You refer to "agnosticism" (as per the Wikipedia article), a very specific philosophical school that derives from, but is not the same as the word "agnostic".

      gnostic: I know for a fact
      agnostic: I don't know

      Example: I am gnostic about my own weight because I just stepped on a scale, but I'm agnostic about the weight of my neighbour, unless he tells me.

      As for beliefs...
      theist: I believe gods exist (specifically: my god) -- active belief
      atheist: I don't believe gods exist -- lack of a belief
      antitheist: I believe gods don't exist -- active belief

      Here's a breakdown in "table" form (sorry for the crappy \w\w -> \w\. formatting):

        . . . . . . . . . . gnostic . . . . . . . . . . . agnostic

      theist . . . I know as an absolute truth . . . . . . I believe in my god(s), but
        . . . . . . . that my god(s) exists . . . . . . . . . . . I don't have proof (knowledge)

      atheist . . I don't believe in any god, and . . . . I don't hold belief in any god, and
        . . . . . . . nobody has, or will in future . . . . . . I can't prove either way
        . . . . . . . have, evidence to make me believe

      antitheist . I know for a fact that . . . . . . . . I believe that no god exists,
        . . . . . . . . no god can exist . . . . . . . . . . . but I don't have proof (knowledge)

      Agnosticism is somewhat similar to gnostic atheism, but makes a much stronger statement (non-subjective). Anyway, I've never met a serious agnosticist.
      I've met plenty of what this new expression "apatheist" describes fittingly, but this is a completely different dimension as it describes intent rather than facts or faith.

    12. Re:hmmm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously, since it's based on English wikipedia. It's explained on the site: http://wikirank.di.unimi.it/faq.html "The English version of Wikipedia is slanted towards the English culture."

    13. Re: hmmm... by antiperimetaparalogo · · Score: 0

      As a Christian i don't consider anyone as "a-theist" because "Theos" exist with/in everyone - but even as just a Greek, and even accepting the neologism "the-ist", "a-theist" still has a problematic meaning of, not just "not believing" but "without God" (that's what happens when "-religious- atheist" define themselves... they need God even for that!).

      Correct me if I'm wrong (I don't speak Greek), but doesn't "atheist" mean without gods generally, rather than just without Yahweh specifically? You wouldn't say pre-Christian Greeks who believed in the Greek pantheon were atheist?

      Well... it's complicated!

      The term "atheist", derived from Greek "a-theos" (with "a-" meaning "without"), means in Greek "someone without God" (singular - and there is no way to make it mean "Gods" as in plural) - the polytheism of my ancient ancestors is not understood right from most non-Greeks (and many Greeks): we had the notion of The God "The Theos" (the unknown), and from there an "ideo-latry" (as in "idea", not idolatry as in "idol") with myths about "Zeus" (and before him his father Cronus and mother Rhea - "gods" themselves, not superior or inferior to their child) and other lesser or equal to "Zeus" ("Zeus" was "first among equals" in Olympus actually) "gods" that had human characteristics - our polytheistic mythology is an ideo-latric description of the human character actualy (where those "gods", e.g., Zeus, had the role of more than humans but less than "The God"), used in tragedy and comedy, with our actual theology (i.e., the serious stuff about "The God" ) present in philosophy. The Greek Orthodox Christian Church (something like the Roman Catholic, with few differences), in which i belong, honors some of our famous philosophers (e.g., Socrates, Platon, Aristotelis - and some even older that we Greeks consider the "fundation" of Hellenism) as "before Christ Christians", exactly because they described "The God" (the one the Jewish may name "Yahweh", but Greeks-Christians consider "beyond name").

      I must also note that, based on the ancient Greek theology/philosophy (but even based on Olympic mythology also), an "atheist" did not even existed as a word with the meaning of "not believing in God" (someone may was disrespectful to God, or temporary -as a condition inflicted by God to disrespectful!- "blind and deaf") but most importantly could NOT exist logicaly (because... well, that is something everyone must thing by himself!).

      Sorry for my lengthy (and late, because my "bad/terrible" /. "karma" limits the number of my allowed replies) answer that i am afraid it does not answer your question! In any case i think it's good that some people (like you), regardless of their beliefs, are a bit more careful and interested about the meaning of those term.

      --
      Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
  7. Those results? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sound about right.

  8. And the most private person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ME! I'm not on Wikipedia at all, and I'm posting as AC here to maintain my privacy!

    1. Re:And the most private person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just as a rough rule of thumb, if you're not on wikipedia then likely your privacy is safe because no one cares.

    2. Re:And the most private person by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tell that to everyone who thinks the NSA is compiling a record on them.

  9. Weird. by Rei · · Score: 1

    Some curious results:

    "occupation:omnivore". Apparently Bob Dillan is the best omnivore out there.
    "gender:animal": Obama is #1.
    "citizenship:cops": Alfred Deacon, the second prime minister of Australia
    "genre:set" William Shakespeare, of course.

    --
    "...but Republicans plan to come back with a new plan, where they just slash the tires on all the ambulances."
  10. Yet TV shows ... by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    ... that more people care about the unreality show crap such as Kartrashians then the spiritually minded Oprah ...

    [Kim Kartrashian] has 25 million Twitter followers, about a million less than Oprah Winfrey and nearly 5 million more than CNN Breaking News.

    NSFW reference

    1. Re:Yet TV shows ... by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 3, Funny

      ... that more people care about the unreality show crap such as Kartrashians[sic] then the spiritually minded Oprah ...

      [Kim Kartrashian] has 25 million Twitter followers, about a million less than Oprah Winfrey and nearly 5 million more than CNN Breaking News.

      NSFW reference

      I remember back when I had no clue who she was. I thought people had started watching Star Trek Deep Space 9 because I kept hearing them talk about the Cardassians. Sadly I had misheard. I do have to say I would watch a show about the Cardassians, especially if it featured Garak he was the best of the characters to come out of that show.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
  11. Grammar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the most important band are the Beatles

    Should it be "is" or "are"?

  12. The word important is being used in a flawed sense by zkiwi34 · · Score: 2

    Do page views really reflect importance? I'd conclude that that proposition is bollocks.

    Classic case in point. No music video even comes close to Psy's "Gangnam Style" in views. But seriously, is it the most important music video? Hint, the answer is not even close.

    I'd even hazard that water is (just probably, slightly) more important than Chocolate, but it wouldn't even register on this measure.

  13. U-S-A! U-S-A! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    U-S-A! We're Number 0!

  14. Netherlands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG, my county, the Netherlands, is at #16.
    We beat Russia and the European Union, among others! :P

  15. Re:The word important is being used in a flawed se by neo-mkrey · · Score: 1

    Water is wet -- what else is there to know about it?