Here's how SKEPTICS.META.STACKEXCHANGE.COM makes money* and how much!

*Please read our disclaimer before using our estimates.
Loading...

SKEPTICS . META . STACKEXCHANGE . COM {}

  1. Analyzed Page
  2. Matching Content Categories
  3. CMS
  4. Monthly Traffic Estimate
  5. How Does Skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com Make Money
  6. Keywords
  7. Topics
  8. Questions
  9. Schema
  10. Social Networks
  11. External Links
  12. Analytics And Tracking
  13. Libraries
  14. CDN Services

We are analyzing https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com/.

Title:
Skeptics Meta Stack Exchange
Description:
Q&A about the site for scientific skepticism
Website Age:
16 years and 0 months (reg. 2009-06-12).

Matching Content Categories {πŸ“š}

  • Video & Online Content
  • Social Networks
  • Politics

Content Management System {πŸ“}

What CMS is skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com built with?

Custom-built

No common CMS systems were detected on Skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com, and no known web development framework was identified.

Traffic Estimate {πŸ“ˆ}

What is the average monthly size of skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com audience?

🚦 Initial Traffic: less than 1k visitors per month


Based on our best estimate, this website will receive around 119 visitors per month in the current month.
However, some sources were not loaded, we suggest to reload the page to get complete results.

check SE Ranking
check Ahrefs
check Similarweb
check Ubersuggest
check Semrush

How Does Skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com Make Money? {πŸ’Έ}

We find it hard to spot revenue streams.

Websites don't always need to be profitable; some serve as platforms for education or personal expression. Websites can serve multiple purposes. And this might be one of them. Skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com could be getting rich in stealth mode, or the way it's monetizing isn't detectable.

Keywords {πŸ”}

views, votes, answers, modified, answer, mod, apr, questions, future, civn, assd, answered, discussion, oddthinking, question, vote, deleted, feb, jan, teams, stack, claim, community, bot, asked, staff, tags, hot, research, discussionanswers, mar, original, slate, jun, meta, site, exchange, unanswered, work, overflow, week, people, mad, scientist, notable, comment, list, sources, give, year,

Topics {βœ’οΈ}

skeptics stack exchange stack overflow life discussionspecific-question simel 33 answer unanswered questions community-mediated sites site discussionbad-faith shadur searching research paper main content log english-language question line partial refund human galactic empire user contributions licensed discussionoriginal-research future expect original research vague quote accurate viewport rendered view definitions discussiondefinitions future ai generated answers contentious comment threads rigourously define happiness 8k modified discussion joe handle questions meta handled vague terms answer offering popular answer original research legal analysis se https discussionanswers future popular tags find answers ukraine closed discussionanswers laurel 39 deleted question answered discussionscopevague future discussionscopevaguedefinitions future discussionscope future discussionscopedefinitions future discussionsupportmoderationflagsmeta future discussionsupport future imho original questions teams asked discussion

Questions {❓}

  • Are answers saying a claim is possible allowed?
  • Are flags on this meta handled at all?
  • Are questions about what situation would make a vague quote accurate in scope?
  • Are questions with vague terms on topic?
  • Can online petitions be used to substantiate notability, ie "a large number of people must be exposed to the claim"?
  • FAQ: Must all questions be notable?
  • How do I improve a deleted question?
  • How much we need to define in a question?
  • How should new information that invalidates a popular answer be handled?
  • How should we deal with (often politically motivated) bad faith notable claims?
  • How to rigourously define happiness or quality of life?
  • Looking for more?
  • May I cite a single article?
  • Optimal transfer to Jupiter?
  • Should I feel guilty for not spending effort on searching research paper before asking?
  • Should long, contentious comment threads be flagged for deletion?
  • Should my answer, which addresses implications in the framing of a question, have been deleted?
  • Should we accept "Is this food healthy?
  • Should we allow answers which put the claim in context and help people think skeptically?
  • Should we expect original research to occur on this site?
  • Should we give more exact definition on what can actually be asked?
  • Under what conditions is "original research" problematic on community-mediated sites?
  • What approach should I take to testing an implied claim for something already answered?
  • What other sources am I supposed to give?
  • When answering, is it acceptable to mainly use a trustworthy website or media as proof?
  • Why are the parts of this answer offering a (IMHO original) legal analysis on-topic, even if that's not even solicited by the Q, and probably wrong?
  • Why aren't we using Stirling Engines to generate energy from Solar instead of PV Cells?
  • Why do I have to list sources for things that are very common knowledge?
  • Why has my comment that a claim is apparently not serious been deleted?
  • Why is it a english-language question?
  • Why was my answer about US tariffs deleted?
  • Why was my question about tanks in Ukraine closed?
  • Why was the definition of the NGO "Breaking the Silence" removed from my question?
  • Why were my comments deleted?

Schema {πŸ—ΊοΈ}

WebSite:
      context:https://schema.org
      name:Skeptics Meta Stack Exchange
      url:https://skeptics.meta.stackexchange.com

External Links {πŸ”—}(54)

Analytics and Tracking {πŸ“Š}

  • Google Analytics
  • Google Analytics 4
  • Google Tag Manager

Libraries {πŸ“š}

  • jQuery

CDN Services {πŸ“¦}

  • Cookielaw
  • Sstatic

2.33s.