Fluther ain't mentioned in wikipedia?

It AIN’T?!!

Heh… it does list some synonyms for “fluther”, though. Like: smack, bloom, brood, smuth, smuck.

Ain’t we all glad this site ain’t called “Smuth.com”? Then we’d all be “smuthers”.

No one’s smuther than you, robmandu.

> > blushes.

< < lurv’ing @niki.

To answer your question, fluther is not a big enough site to be on wikipedia. You can look up an estimated number of monthly visitors each month at compete.

@mirza: but there is no “minimum monthly visitor” criterion for wikipedia inclusion. I think the most applicable rule is “The Primary Notability Criterion”, which states:

An article’s subject is notable if it has been the subject of non-trivial published works by multiple separate sources that are independent of that subject itself.

When I google “fluther.com” I get 48,700 hits! Random spot checking of these suggests they are almost all referring to this website and the majority are blogs discussing the site. Surely that merits notability?

@nikipedia: the amount of visitors a site gets equals to how popular a site is. So pageviews = notability. When you google my username / tumblelog name, i get 8230 hits. That doesn’t mean its a notable site. To give you an understanding as to how little the pageviews are compared to the internet, heres a chart comparing the pageviews of fluther versus this small site we launched back in February of this year

But wikipedia’s guidelines don’t make any reference to popularity, just notability which they seem to define differently than you.

What difference does notability make as to whether something gets added to Wikipedia?

All kinds of crackpot, less than reputable, concepts get mentioned there. The point of the whole wiki attitude is that anyone can add whatever they want. And the community works together to police content, yadda yadda, yadda.

Hell, I could start a Fluther page there. 80% of what I’d write would be wrong. They’d throw up a warning about needing citations and reference. And anyone else with the real facts could correct the many mistakes.

Right?

@robmandu: You can, but it will get taken down. They made the site; they make the rules. Here’s what they say about notability.

Ahhh… well, I don’t think Askville is notable. But maybe, that’s just me. ;-)

@robmandu: Well, yes and no. But that’s why I pointed out the sheer number of google hits. A lot of them are probably garbage, but it looks to me like tens of thousands of them are legit.

oh yah, @mirza, muxtape is your work? Man, that’s cool. First heard about that from Gruber.

And apparently, it is notable.

@robmandu – not my sole work. I just do the design work. justin does the magic stuff

What? No article? Maybe you should create one. Maybe we should create one, it is a community encyclopedia is it not? If something doesn’t exist and you think it should have an article, create one and it will grow and pad out eventually, if we don’t create one, who will?