Top Ten Discussion

I've always felt that Top 10 lists weren't a good idea for web sites because they tend to self-preserve themselves. Everyone reads the top 10 sites so those sites get the most hits and end up staying on top 10... $0.02. -- PatNotes?

I find it a bit disturbing that RecentChanges and the five or so newest pages seem to be on TopTen continuously. -- OleAndersen

I think the last 2,000 hits is too small of a sample. None of the real pages have more than 20 hits. Maybe 10,000 would yield more interesting results? -- JimLittle

I'd like to know the time period for which the log is sampled. There is a starting time given at the beginning of the page, but what kind of time is this: universal or local, and if local, then which zone?

Why not reveal the bottom ten, as measured over a long period? Might indicate what needs some dusting off. -- EdwardKiser

Or better yet, the oldest ten, measured by the last time they were { edited | read }. (See AncientChanges.)

Having a list of the BottomTen? pages would be a great feature. While a TopTen is self-preserving (not just on websites, either - how about PopChart?s?), a BottomTen? would be changing constantly, since people would be checking out the BottomTen?, thus removing them from the list. -- AalbertTorsius

I like this idea, but for a possibly different reason. A list of all WikiPages sorted from least recently edited at the top would be an interesting view of "core" Wiki.
See TopTen, ManualTopTen, many other IndexingSchemes

View edit of October 27, 2005 or FindPage with title or text search