Dave Torr wrote:
There is a Birding Top 500 meter on the home page. I am very suspicious of
these as the list of top sites in the world sometimes has very surprising
entries!
Hi there Dave and other birders,
What are you suspicious of?
Listed are many fine and very popular sites, including blogs about birds
written by groups or - as is the case with my blog - written by
individuals. Many listed in the top 100 sites are from the world's
leading birding and ornithological organisations.
Do you mean that the list includes some sites which sell optics and
other items relating to birds, things like t-shirts, bird houses, bird
feed, for example? The owner of the Birding Top 500 site has allowed
these according to his specific rules. I fail to see why you should be
suspicious of these sites - they openly advertise their wares for sale
and are legitimate businesses (as far as I know - but buyer beware!)
The Birding Top 500 site lists sites purely on the number of visitors
that they attract. The more traffic they get, the higher the ranking. It
is a crude measure and only an indicator of popularity, little else.
I include the meter on my blog merely as a simple indicator to my
readers. (I hope it also leads readers to other interesting sites via
the link.) I also monitor my statistics with a far more sophisticated
site which gives a complete breakdown of where my readers live, which
entries are visited the most, which search engines they use as well as
number of unique visitors, number of visitors, page views and many other
items. This information can be analysed on an hourly, daily or monthly
basis.
Because of this I only use the Birding Top 500 meter as an crude
indicator - nothing more. I'm currently listed at #55 and have been in
the 50s for the last few months. The highest I've been is about #30.
Despite 600+ visitors daily from 100+ countries, I will never go much
higher because the top 50 sites are largely made up of large
organisations with 1000s of contributors, subscribers or members. One
person cannot complete with that - nor do I wish to.
My aim is to share my bird sightings and photos - and if I enthuse a few
people to observe and care for our birds a little more, I will have
achieved my aims.
I've included John's original email below to set the context of this
discussion. John's site is meticulously comprehensive in its contents
but will - in my opinion - never rank much higher than #200. It is just
not the kind of site that will be popular by any measure.
Scientifically accurate - yes.
Comprehensive - yes.
Authoritative - yes.
Useful - yes - but only to a limited number of people unfortunately.
I believe that John should not be concerned about the popularity of the
site and should be encouraged to continue his quest for a very
comprehensive resource.
Dear Friends,
I am disappointed that the rating for my website
http://www.worldbirdinfo.net <http://www.worldbirdinfo.net/>
has fallen so low. Here are some reasons for raising its rating. I have
been going systematically through the records, and improving notably
habitat, movements, pictures and calls. I have completed all
Ostriches,Rheas,Cassowaries,Emus.Tinamous.Loons, Albatrosses,and I am into
Petrels. With very few exceptions I have added photos to all of these
(even
of Atitlan Grebe!), and calls for many, inlcuding several albatrosses and
petrels.
Check it out! And keep checking it out! And tell your friends and
colleagues.
John Penhallurick
--
Trevor Hampel
Murray Bridge
South Australia
Check out my BLOGS (web logs):
Trevor's Birding - observations and photos of birds at
http://www.trevorsbirding.com
Trevor's Travels - travels in Australia, Thailand and Nepal at
http://www.trevorstravels.com
Trevor's Writing - read some of my writing at http://www.trevorhampel.com
Twitter: follow me on Twitter - http://twitter.com/TrevorHampel
===============================
www.birding-aus.org
birding-aus.blogspot.com
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
===============================
|
