Comments on: Why Wikipedia should remove themselves from Search Engines

By: GeorgeT

GeorgeT — Sun, 30 Mar 2008 05:20:48 +0000

Wanna watch over 3000 TV station ?

Here! !
Check:

http://tomtom14.ipodpsp.hop.clickbank.net/?tid=ONLINETV - Watch TV online 3000 stations

GeorgeT

By: bus pass

bus pass — Sat, 03 Feb 2007 14:31:39 +0000

bus pass…

SomegifttoME 377090 bus pass moves…

By: D. Johnson

D. Johnson — Tue, 24 Oct 2006 20:54:25 +0000

Ha! — Yeh I agree with you on that Wormus. Maybe the pages which are locked out and pretty much “up to date” can be crawled but then again where does it end.

I think the solution though is for Google to not treat wikis with so highly and to in general trim down the importance of internal linking.

Content is supposed to be king, but at present quality “keyword rich” internal links are king.

By: Aaron Wormus

Aaron Wormus — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 20:21:35 +0000

You would think that facts are facts which don’t change. If everyone was correct but with a different point of view then why does so much work go into wikipedians beating back spam, or vandals?

I hope you aren’t editing the english wikipedia… THAT would be “non-sense”

By: Traroth

Traroth — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 18:54:49 +0000

At Wikipedia, we are not thinking the same. Return to basics : The purpose of the project is to build collectively a encyclopedia, by letting *everybody* contribute. So manage in order Google or others to stop to reference Wikipeda would be a non-sense.

By: Aaron Wormus

Aaron Wormus — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:23:47 +0000

I would have to argue that the more accurate an article becomes, the more chance that a random submitter will make it incorrect rather than correct.

If I start a stub then anything anyone says will benefit the article, however if the article has been around for years, and some random person (not a wikipedian) comes to add “facts” then I would venture to say that they will hurt the project more than they benefit it.

By: Traroth

Traroth — Mon, 23 Oct 2006 12:12:22 +0000

On the contrary, the aim for Wikipedia is to lead more and more people to contribute and to improve weak articles. And fact is Wikipedia articles *are* improving, so claiming “(…) you also get a lot more random people who surf in through google (…)and end up editing the article and bringing the quality down” is simply not true. It’s the opposite.

By: Aaron Wormus

Aaron Wormus — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 19:14:51 +0000

Just try, they will smack your spam down so fast it will make your head swim

By: Xanthous

Xanthous — Thu, 19 Oct 2006 18:49:36 +0000

Was that a hidden marketing tip??