free html hit counter 'Web 2.0', Wikipedia's Most Cited Term of 2006 - John Battelle's Search Blog

'Web 2.0', Wikipedia's Most Cited Term of 2006

By - January 04, 2007

Picture 5-14From O’Reilly:

Jen Pahlka of CMP, our co-producer on the Web 2.0 Conference, just sent a pointer to an Advertising Age article noting that Web 2.0 was the most cited Wikipedia article of the year, beating out such pop-culture topics as Steve Irwin, Mark Foley, and Snakes on a Plane, as well as other tech topics like blog, Ajax, and RSS.

And I have to say, the Wikipedia article on Web 2.0 is indeed pretty darn good, so I just incremented that link count by one… (But do still read my own What is Web 2.0? 🙂

Despite all the debate about whether the name is or is not useful, which seems to crop up with some regularity in comments on this blog, it has indeed captured something important about the zeitgeist of the time.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

11 thoughts on “'Web 2.0', Wikipedia's Most Cited Term of 2006

  1. seonewsblog says:

    Yup I have know this for a while. It’s where I learned a lot of things about web 2.0.

    Thank You

  2. Dave White says:

    Yes Web 2.0 is indeed very interesting and the articles and post related to it have lots of importance on online blogs and forums.Everyone is curious to know more about it .

  3. John says:

    Ain’t it funny: “The neutrality of this article or section may be compromised by weasel words.
    You can help Wikipedia by improving weasel-worded statements.”

    Also interesting:

  4. Search The Web 2 says:

    This is the first step. Hope more will come this year. Web 2.0 is still too new to an average person.

  5. Oracep says:

    How to better rank a reading list

    Wiki’s entry on Web 2.0 is impressive, but how has it ranked the thinking quality of the external links? Here is our new ranking of four documents from the list using Coning. The Paracone Index shows which third of the document has most of the higher order thinking. Notice also ‘CP’. This means that the document is too large for Paraconing, but Cascaded Paraconing would extract sequenced premier thinking.

    Support List
    Author Wiki List Coned Index New Rank Paracone Index Words
    Strange 1 74 2 1 2019
    La Monica 2 75 1 3 995
    Graham 3 71 3 2 3102
    Kelly 4 69 4 CP 5613

    Critical List
    Author Wiki List Coned Index New Rank Paracone Index Words
    Anderson 1 82 2 2 245
    Kyanka 2 78 3 1 1071
    Shaw 3 83 1 1 673
    Carr 4 77 4 1 2711

  6. It must be AWESOME to create & Publicize a term, then watch it constantly become used by millions worldwide and perhaps last for decades.

    Wonder how the creators of these Classic Geek terms must be feeling:


    Perhaps they can be traced for a future interview or Topic

  7. JoeDuck says:

    John – I expect you and Tim O to let everybody know when Web 2.0 jumps the shark. Cover of Time? Top Wikipedia? Maybe it’ll be when your *mother* starts saying “John, about the new blog mashup I’m working on…”

  8. Keith Cash says:

    Web 2.0 has done a good job of selling itself. I know I have seen more articles and pieces in magazines this year than any other topic

  9. Equigas says:

    No wonder web 2.0 is so quoted as it looks like its one of the words nobody knows what it exactly mean but everyone likes to talk about.

  10. Web 2.0 give almost a “cartoonish” look to sites (with large buttons and brighter colors).

  11. sanderson says:

    Since when I came to know about this web 2.0, always loved to read comments on web 2.0 It was funny. But in reality if go in the depth of this topic, there is no standards set for web 2.0 and there were no standards for web 1.0 either. Anyway this subject is interesting and attracted lots of online visitor towards itself. You will love to read the discussion on it in this thread…