jabb i think dave was only talking about seo aspect of sites, i think he is some seo junkie . Thats what i understood so far from his dissucions and replies to my comments. But the reason you provided i was i was thinking of as why aviva or alive would be listed, just cause they are hot on dp does not mean they are popular around the globe. But why am i dragging alive to discussion, its about aviva mostly as thread is about aviva.
I luv Aviva, looking at the Google backlink update it gives off Google backlinks for fun, some of the directories listed in Wki have bare categories that are not even indexed, I luv Alive as well, thing I like about Alive is the way your detail pages are interlinked I have 10 so far, I have a master plan to get about 50 and get all of my detail pages upto PR6, I don't think a directory has to make TV or news for it to be noteable, has starting point made the news? Or Joeant? Or any of the others bar Business.com? Why are these other ones in there? To me Directories are there for one reason and one reason only and that is to help business websites rank, if they don't do that in my eyes and the vast majority of directory submitters eyes they are not worth a toffey, this is what the industry is about and Wiki needs to recognise that Aviva and Alive are the best two and list them both. FAO Jabb Aviva is big everywhere, if you think it is only big on DP then I suggest you open your eyes and look at some other websites, I see it advertised on big time UK business websites, blogs and forums it is all over the place.
I think Business.com are Spamming the Wikipedia LOL Take a look at one example among dozens. http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt...usiness.com+site:wikipedia.org&ei=UTF-8&x=wrt Yahoo shows 50 links from wikipedia to Business.com Let’s visit 1 Page with Business.com link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentamedia now let’s visit the link at Business.com http://www.business.com/directory/r...umer_electronics/pentamedia_graphics_limited/ That is almost the same content as this Page 1 http://www.corporateinformation.com/snapshot.asp?SentBy=Home&cusip=C356L3820 Take your own conclusions But I don’t see the Business.com link adding any value to the wikipedia page..
Spamming gits they have got em on the payroll I reckon: Check this one out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Vuitton Links to Business.com company profiles that say about 20 words about the company, what value is that adding? I tried to remove the link but you can't, Business.com have got Wiki on the payroll plain and simple, Wiki are corrupt!
Well money can buy almost anything, even 50 links at Wikipedia.. If I had the money to buy 50 links at Wiki probably I could have some "notability".
Dave - Aviva is currently experiencing some very positive growth and it's disappointing that few have noticed. I wouldn't be surprised to see Aviva getting some of the attention you feel the deserve before year's end if they continue at their current pace. With the recent addition of a small editorial staff their index has grown by approximately 17% in the last 2 weeks alone. The majority of these listings are editor additions in previously existing and new categories. You'll just have to give it some time.
OK, here's a question for you all: how notable is Wikipedia itself? I mean, it may dominate the SERPs and have us all worked up about it, but would we give two figs if people like us didn't link to it in threads like this? If you don't like what it does, just don't link to it!
For the most part it is pretty dead on... But when visiting some links, like the one about the Thornton Quarry, I found that "Photographs from a field trip" has not got anything to do with the Quarry... Now if you wonder through that link/blog, you will eventually find the field trip/pics, however the link is bogus, crap, junk, and it's been there for quite a while... Come on Wiki editors... Lately you are about as useless as DMOZ editors.
Well, I think there is a HUGE difference between Wiki and DMOZ. If you identify a spam entry, you don't even have to "apply" to edit the page, you can just delete the spam yourself immediately. In short, you ARE an editor and you just neglected your duty...
Credible reference? About two sentances about the company, have they got you on the payroll as well? It's like me going to the Nominet page and placing a link at the bottom to: http://www.biz-dir.co.uk/detail/link-169.html Saying Nominet's profile in Biz Dir. Before christmas I tried to place a link on the Yahoo! Directory page to my article about it: http://www.seoco.co.uk/the-yahoo-directory.html Now the information in my article is way more usefull then the Wiki article itself but the link got removed, you know why? Because I haven't got Wiki on the payroll and I haven't got an employee working as a senior editor at Wiki.
I've changed the link 3 times in the past.. Just did so again prior to writing this. It always seems to revert back to the old one.. Someone overseas the final approval of addition/deletions.. That is something to take into consideration. It looked like the source was for financial data, which that site seemed to contain... Still looks like a credible source.
I'm not really talking about the accuracy or inaccuracy of Wikipedia, that's a whole other story. I'm more concerned that it's supposed to be 100% a second or third-hand source of information. This makes it redundant, IMO. It, and its clones, are not something I would want to list on any of my own directories or other sites.