This will resolve to the title of the English article on Wikipedia that has the most pageviews in January 2024 per this resolution source.
PS In case of false positives (trying not to count them) or doubtful results from source, I reserve the right to resolve according to my judgement.
⚡⚡⚡
Here is the list of Top 10 Articles from December 2023:
And whole 2023:
Previous lists of most-popular English Wikipedia articles are available for 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015.
-----------------
Here is a market for whole 2024:
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ2,165 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,969 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,734 | |
| 4 | Ṁ1,078 | |
| 5 | Ṁ956 |
Let's trade on February: https://manifold.markets/itsTomekK/what-will-be-the-most-popular-wikip-938adc034b52
@itsTomekK I guess it is too late already because people have bet there. But probably worth considering excluding it if it makes it both in January and February
Saltburn has been the top page per week for the last 3 weeks, at a considerable distance from Youtube:
@SantiagoRomeroBrufau That page for some reason doesn't have youtube whatsoever, indicating it is excluded. However, the resolution source may still include it in the monthly.
@ScipioFabius I think it is excluded because it is a “false positive”.
@SantiagoRomeroBrufau most likely, but the resolution source may or may not exclude it, so bet accordingly.
@ScipioFabius The market description says:
“In case of false positives (trying not to count them) or doubtful results from source, I reserve the right to resolve according to my judgement.”
I hope this doesn’t become a market on “Will the source count Youtube as a false positive even though it seems clear that it is”
@benshindel sure!
The best for this market is to use the resolution source directly - once their January stat is out. If it's excluded, then according to the description - Youtube (or others) would not count.
If in monthly stat Youtube is included... I would wait 3 days (after monthly stat release) before the resolution, in case they have a lag on false positives.
Is this fine, what do you think?
@Lion I would suggest not buying NO shares in "Other" because once somebody adds a new answer it automatically buys YES shares in all of the options that were present before (or converts the NO shares to YES? Im not sure).
@ScipioFabius I've been there, I've done that, I don't see a problem. I hold currently 355 NO-shares. If somebody adds an answer, I'll hold 355 YES-shares of every answer expect Others and the added answer. (Than I'll be able to sell them individually if I wish or hold them.) It's the same in the end, just looks a little bit messy in the ui.
@Lion I mean, why not just buy YES shares in the answers you actually think can make it? You're essentially taking a loss by buying shares in options you dont think will make it.
@ScipioFabius Because I think every suggested option can make it. I'll usually buy shares, if I think an option is overpriced or underpriced. I think right now the market is priced pretty well expect others. And it's easier and faster to buy one position no than multiple one yes. And I always can just add an option an sell yes-shares if I'll wish to do so.
@NeoPangloss Looks like he just scraped it off of the source page and made it himself. Looks like an excel graph to me?
@ScipioFabius @NeoPangloss Yes, the linked page lets you download all daily views data as .csv. Makes things pretty easy. I just compiled all the data so far this month in Excel, then a bit of filtering, processing, and concatenation gave me this graph.