Wikipedia talk:Most-referenced articles

message: Unsurprisingly, the most referenced pages are those linked to by every one of a hojillion Rambot-generated US city pages. :) --Brion 23:50, 14 Aug 2003 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Could it be usefull to detect the changes in this list, e.g Article 
XY:  
week=1 position=250
week=2 position=200
in order to have an overview which topics are newly covered, and to make later an ranking of interesting topics like Google_zeitgeist?--Nerd 16:19, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: changes

message: Featured artical's, or at least at that standerd out of the top 100. main rational, if thats what all the links are too, then shuly they must be good, or... tooto 21:27, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  How many are... 

message: It's over three months now and somehow out of date. — HenryLi (Talk) 16:03, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any updates? 

message: I would've thought that making these articles FAs would be something of a priority. Perhaps those that are already FAs could be shown in bold? The only disadvantage is that it would highlight the dismal number of these articles that actually are FAs (only 1 of the top 25). Soo 15:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured articles 

message: Although Second World War redirects to World War II, the two are listed seperately, with World War II in 27th with 28259 links and Second World War in 259th with 3712 links. If links to redirects could somehow be folded in with the main article's listing, World War II would likely be in 19th with 31971 links, and other articles with commonly-linked redirects might have their rankings shift significantly as well. I appreciate this might be a difficult programming puzzle, but if it were possible, it would be nice to have it. UnDeadGoat 00:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  World War II/Second World War 

message: Any update for these few months?  — HenryLi (Talk) 07:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's been a year now... any chance of a revision?  DJR (T) 03:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update? 

message: *Sydney (6288 links)
*United_States_of_America (5843 links)
We love you too!
Guess us ozzies need to start researching and writing up articles on the USofA. ;) Alastair Haines 16:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Priorities lookin' good

message: There is one section in need of cleanup on the project page, because it is in a gray box with blue dotted outline that copies the text in the edit box, rather than what it is supposed to appear as. I looked at this section in the edit box, and I couldn't see what was wrong. What's wrong? Us441 (talk) 17:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup in need 

message: Why aren't these stats pages kept updated? They have been neglected for years! Newjerseyliz (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're that concerned then you can update them yourself. CallMeSalticidae (talk) 22:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating? 

message: It seems pretty obvious that the only reason ISBN is ranked so high is because it's automatically linked by many citation templates. I think that shouldn't really count for anything and that templated links like that should be deducted from the total.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.61.180.106 (talk) 00:38, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  ISBN and such