Talk:Similarweb
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Requested move
edit- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: material from Similarweb and SimilarGroup cut-and-paste moved incorrectly to SimilarWeb by the nominator. Rather than attempt a messy histmerge, I will put attribution on the talk page of the new article, despite it being a recreation of an article that was previously deleted as a result of a deletion discussion. DrKay (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Similarweb → SimilarWeb – Page should be renamed as far as SimilarWeb Ltd. itself uses this type of inscription of it's company name as we can see it from the company logo. Therefore readers would be able to recognize the company instantly and be sure that they got on the right page. Moreover existing SimilarWeb page is empty and has redirection to the current page. Google also shows you the company name it the format mentioned above: https://www.google.co.il/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=similarweb Cohentom (talk) 05:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- I agree. I had the same thought. eBay for example has the main article under eBay, not ebay. --Melody Lavender (talk) 05:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
- Support per various precedents, as long as the CamelCase usage is demonstrably consistent. If it's not and they just style it this way sometimes (what about in their legal filings?), then do not move, also per lots of precedent. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼ 13:43, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Requested revision
edit | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. ADV — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:22, 18 June 2021 (UTC) |
Hope I'm doing it right now - Can you please set the intro to fit the one before the editing?: Similarweb is a digital intelligence solution provider for enterprise and small to mid-sized business (SMB) customers. The platform provides web analytics services for businesses. The company offers its customers information on their clients' and competitors' web traffic volumes, referral sources which include keyword analysis and demographics, and website "stickiness" (e.g., time on site, page views, bounce rate), as well as other features. It extrapolates data from a panel of web users who allow the monitoring of their internet activity, combined with direct observations for a subset of internet properties, such as websites' own traffic statistics. In 2019, it claimed to have the world's largest panel, with hundreds of millions users.[1] This was the published version here until earlier today (+ the 1st sentence). Lem4 (talk) 14:52, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Not done This doesn't really describe the company in a lead-like way, but it comes off as advertorial. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:22, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
References
- ^ {{cite web|url=https://www.similarweb.com/corp/ourdata/%7Ctitle=Our Data
= Hmm... Alexa Internet\shut down on 1 May 2021\and SimilarWeb's IPO was 12 days later. This isn't worth mentioning??? 142.181.93.182 User talk:142.181.93.182|talk 17:03, 10 October 2022 UTC
Should Similarweb be cited to report web traffic rankings on Wikipedia?
editI have reposted this at Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Computing#Should_Similarweb_be_cited_to_report_web_traffic_rankings_on_Wikipedia? where I should have in the first place. My apologies, I misunderstood that the talk page is not the correct venue for this type of discussion.
- @LoVeloDogs: They've suggested Wikipedia:Reliable Sources Noticeboard is probably the best place. Feel free to ping me when you post there. If Similarweb is a no-go, we'll need to find another measure of website notability and potentially delete ~dozens of articles. --Komonzia (talk) 20:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! I have copied the discussion over to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Should_Similarweb_be_cited_to_report_web_traffic_rankings_on_Wikipedia? & am very interested to see the result. LoVeloDogs (talk) 21:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)