User talk:GrowTHC

Alexa / SimilarWeb

 * You claimed Alexa no longer is active or now out of date. Where is your source that Alexa company is now defunct, out of date and no longer has a working engine? You should back your reasoning with sources.

I earlier today checked the Alexa list and it showed many Chinese websites..Alibaba obviously has more visitors than EBay by a huge margin. That alone shows how flawed SimilarWeb is.

And what possibly even makes SimilarWeb special compared to 20 other similar firms?

You should be aware it's against the rules to commercially promote a corporation especially when it doesn't deserve it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1027518105 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1026260314

You appear to be only promoting SimilarWeb as the VAST majority of your 6 month edit history appears to narrowly focused to make that company into some top source on Wikipedia. My background is that I have been in IT industry for almost 2 decades and the one thing I understand perfectly well is that SimilarWeb lacks brand recognition. Wikipedia shouldn't be the place to give it brand recognition. I don't know your relationship to SimilarWeb but you definitely don't have consensus on Talk to completely remove Alexa and replace it with a flawed source. I added my reply to you on the article's Talk page. I would like you to reply and discuss there.O&#39;NeilFreeDumb97 (talk) 23:19, 4 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi, I do not promote anyone, but I do work in the internet industry for a long time to know the majority of most tools and datasets used out there. As this is one of my main areas of interest I usually engage with that type of content, which I mostly know best and even then I only fix facts mostly. Specifically in this case I stumbled across that discussion after seeing a lot of online turbulence around Similarweb, and since the whole data accuracy issue is something I care deeply about I saw an op to do something good. I also wrote the that I will try to add more sources when I find them (and can also put back Alexa), or if someone else has one. I may have misunderstood the original discussion and thought the meaning was removal, that's true. I saw very unhappy reactions, which I agree with. (Regarding where I know their status, again i've been around this industry for a while). What dso you think is best for now? Add back Alexa?

Disambiguation links
Thanks for your edits to List of most visited websites however this edit reintroduced links to dismabiguation pages rather than the specific articles relating to the entries in the list. You can highlight dab links by going to your preferences, then gadgets & tick "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange".&mdash; Rod talk 21:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, you have removed the correct wikilinks from List of most visited websites and replaced them with links to disambiguation pages. You have also added links such as Fandom, Office and Weather which lead to unrelated articles.  Rather than just putting brackets round the words, please ensure that wikilinks lead to the correct articles.  Thanks, Certes (talk) 12:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi, I usually just format and paste the table as is.
 * If you provide a specific list of the problematic links I'll make sure I replace them manually each time. Ok? GrowTHC (talk) 13:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem: List of most visited websites
Hello GrowTHC! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as List of most visited websites, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
 * Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:List of most visited websites and send an email with confirmation of permission to "[mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org ]". Make sure they quote the exact page name, List of most visited websites, in their email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org ] or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:List of most visited websites. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:List of most visited websites with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

See Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:List of most visited websites saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Numberguy6 (talk) 20:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Upon investigating this (by reading the terms for using Similarweb's data at https://www.similarweb.com/corp/legal/terms/), I unfortunately have to agree with Numberguy6's point about how its traffic data is copyrighted, and how using it in this manner appears to be a violation of that. The relevant points I found are as follows:
 * Sections 1.1 and 1.2: Similarweb owns this platform, plus its point is give information about it and to let users purchase a subscription to it
 * Section 2: It explicitly states that only people 18 or older should use this information, that ones between 13 and 18 should only use it if supervised by a guardian or parent, and that ones who are 13 or younger should not visit Similarweb. Given that it is possible that some Wikipedia users are under 13 (or are between 13 and 18 but who are not actually being supervised by an adult), posting its data here may potentially go against the condition in this section.
 * Section 3: It goes over authorized users and subscribers, but includes an email address to contact for information (support (at) similarweb (dot) com). So, I suspect that, if you wanted to use its information in a Wikipedia entry, you would first want to email them and ask.
 * Section 6 (restrictions): Users are not allowed to distribute, display, give, etc. any portion of this site, platform, or application to any third party, unless it explicitly goes with the terms of use that are listed.
 * Section 9.1: This site, its content, its applications, etc. belong to Similarweb and are protected by copyright law. The exception is if you are granted rights to them.
 * At the end, it includes an email address to contact if you have questions: legal (at) similarweb (dot) com
 * On top of that, nowhere on that list does it say anything about the information there being public domain or creative commons. And, based on what is listed there, it unfortunately sounds like posting this information on a Wikipedia entry is, at present, violating Similarweb's copyright, even though it is publicly available on its website and is useful information.  So, I would advise that you do the following:
 * 1. Temporarily take this page down, since it has Similarweb's own copyrighted information and since it does not appear to grant others permission to display it publicly in a forum like a Wikipedia entry, and since you might be given a takedown notice if they find out it's here. If you need help with this, contact the page's administrator.
 * 2. If you wish to continue listing that information here, contact Similarweb (probably its legal department), and ask if you can post its information for free as a Wikipedia entry, solely for informational purposes. And, abide by what they say.
 * 3. If they say no or demand payment for doing so, one thing you might consider doing might be to include a list of a few organizations (such as Similarweb, Ahrefs, Semrush, Cloudfare, and similar services [see https://www.contentpowered.com/blog/alexa-com-dead-alternatives/ for a list of 20 alternatives to Alexa]), to explain in brief what they do, and to include a link to them so that users can view said information. Then again, I am no lawyer or Wikipedia administrator, so if you choose to go this route, I'd advise running this by whoever administers this page before doing that, to see if they thought it was ok.
 * I am sorry to be the bearer of bad news, and hope that you're able to put this information to use. Best of luck with this. Mateo Tembo (talk) 00:20, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok thank you for your answer. I do think that since this list is publicly and freely published it should be allowed, I will reach out to Similarweb for their approval of this.
 * Thank you also for the references. Knowing many of these tools I don't really see a better alternative, they are not at all an alternative and some of them are downright bad. Thank you again! GrowTHC (talk) 08:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, GrowTHC. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Silikonz 💬 02:14, 4 May 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, I already discussed this issue via email, to which I also sent proper confirmations regarding the topic above. There are no conflicts of interest here, I saw an out of date page in which I could update the data very easily, and so I did. I try to keep the habit of updating it every month. Thanks. GrowTHC (talk) 13:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reply; however, this seemed just a bit too partial to me, which is why I suspected. Silikonz (alt) 💬  23:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok got it, I'll try to avoid it next. GrowTHC (talk) 08:43, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a link directory
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:41, 19 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Oh Ok, did not know that, I'll make sure to make them nofollow next! I thought it's better to link to the website when there's no Wiki page for it, but cool GrowTHC (talk) 09:29, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of List of most visited websites for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of most visited websites, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/List of most visited websites until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikilinks
Thank you for updating List of most-visited websites. Please can you restore the correct wikilinks? For example, Telegram should continue to link to Telegram (software) rather than the article Telegram which is about paper telegrams, and Max should link to Max (streaming service) rather than the disambiguation page Max. You may wish to copy the fixes we've been making after each previous update which are stored in the page history. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 12:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I see that you have again overwritten the correct links with unhelpful ones, and your edit has been reverted. I appreciate your efforts to keep the page updated, but please source your figures and stop linking to targets such as Telegram which are not about websites but about things which share their names. Certes (talk) 12:13, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detectedthat when you recently edited List of most-visited websites, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Max. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 17:49, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Similarweb and misleading edit summary
Hello. This edit summary is far too vague and somewhat misleading. You removed an entire category and also restored flags, despite multiple editors having previously removed them. Above you mention that you do not have a conflict of interest with Similarweb, but it does really appear that most (or all?) of your edits are to emphasize the importance of that website. Please do not use Wikipedia for promotion. If people want to see what Similarweb has to say, they can just go to that website. Republishing this information via Wikipedia is not helpful. Grayfell (talk) 21:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * GrowTHC: You removed the entire sourced category yet again with another misleading edit summary. Please stop. Missjaenna (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Not sure what was removed and what you claim is misleading. This is a list with a set format that's been updating for over a year with the same format. The change I make here is a monthly data update, once the web data is updated on the source website (seems this was the format in which the list ran with for years). The only things that were changed are things that were probably implemented inside the data after it's been updated.
 * Moreover, adding unreliable data sources is not the thing here. That is why the Alexa ranking was removed to begin with.
 * In case you have issues with flags, I'll try to avoid it next time I update the data.
 * This is a monthly data updated from a verified & free source, it updates in the same format every month, and trying to manipulate it will always result in an overwrite when the data is updated again. If you want to add data make sure it's from a reliable source regarding web-traffic data, and that it's updated each month. GrowTHC (talk) 10:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Moreover - I see now that you actually went and changed the entire website list to fit your data, please avoid that. You are using a bad and unreliable data source. If you actually look at the data you can see it's a joke, however I left it in until I update it again. GrowTHC (talk) 10:37, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 12
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of most-visited websites, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Max.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 18:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Final warning
Despite multiple warnings above, I see that you have replaced correct wikilinks by incorrect ones in List of most-visited websites yet again. I have just fixed them for the final time. If you change them back again, this will be considered vandalism and may result in removal of editing privileges. If you do not understand this message, please reply indicating what needs to be clarified. Certes (talk) 11:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hey @Certes, I apologize for the misunderstanding, I was under the impression I already fixed the article based on your comments. I have now updated the list to include January 2024 data, and have fixed the Wikilinks for Max, Telegram and Weather. I also made changes to a few other which I thought might be more relevant like Live.com to refer to outlook.com since it's the new "version" of that email service, microsoftonline.com to MSN, etc.
 * My intention wasn't to vandalize the page and I apologize for that, if there's anything else you think I should fix, please let me know, and I'll be more than happy to do it :) GrowTHC (talk) 15:25, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much. I noticed your update and commented below at the same time you were replying. Certes (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

February 2024 update
Thank you for fixing the wikilinks in the latest update. There's just one more that I've been changing: Fandom (website) rather than Fandom. Does the column for Semrush match the cited source? For example, looking at position 5, List of most-visited websites has xvideos (which Semrush ranks at 8) but Semrush has Twitter (which the article ranks at 37). Are you using a different source? It might be helpful to archive the version you use, in case it changes frequently. Thanks again, Certes (talk) 15:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I'll notice to update Fandom as well for next time.
 * As for SEMrush, I haven't updated their list because honestly I trust Similarweb data better and according to what I saw, SEMrush only ranks websites according to organic traffic and doesn't take into account all the traffic channels.
 * I have been updating this article for a long period of time on a monthly basis when Similarweb data was available, and someone added SEMrush data a few months ago and has neglected to update since December.
 * This in my opinion doesn't make them a credible source for this article, I recommend removing the SEMrush column. GrowTHC (talk) 09:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * At the very least, SEMrush needs a note saying it is outdated. I've no opinion on its accuracy. Certes (talk) 11:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC)