1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

google should penalize wikipedia

Discussion in 'Google' started by silent10, Feb 11, 2007.

  1. nathan76

    nathan76 Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #21
    I am concerned that Wikipedia is becoming Napster of intellectual property. No secret, its writers often take their information from other web sites, which often takes years and a lot of money to build. They then copy or slightly re-phrase the information and post it online, essentially denying the original sites traffic/ad revenue. I do not even mention accuracy of such "research," Stephen Colbert described that well.

    It might be a matter of time, when a number of serious publishers bring a class-action copyright infringement lawsuit against them, which could bankrupt them.
     
    nathan76, Feb 12, 2007 IP
    Obelia likes this.
  2. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #22
    [[George W. Bush]] has 33,566 revisions. Good luck figureing out who should be credited for what.

    Wikipedia is a gift economy. Not a way for sites to get traffic.

    Because that is how charity works.

    Not really because it means the reader may well end up with less than ideal links.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  3. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #23
    Given the shoot on sight approach to copyvios that seems unlikely.

    You can't copyright information only the way is presented.

    If you find copyvios please report them to:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Copyright_problems

    So they can be removed.

    No DMCA safe harbour. Wikipedia does far more than is required (it actively hunts down copyvios).
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  4. nathan76

    nathan76 Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #24
    Don't get me wrong, IMHO. However, every time something which is usually expensive and time-consuming is suddenly becoming easy and free, I see two possibilities: either some kind of breakthrough was achieved or a crime was committed.

    When a crook on the street offers you a Rolex watch for $30, you know that it is either stolen or a cheap replica. This is an analogy for quality and the origin of some Wikipedia material -- it might be copied, it might be sloppy research, or a biased propaganda from some corporation or a politician. That said, I do believe most Wikipedia contributors are honest and well intentioned.
     
    nathan76, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  5. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #25
    The GNU Compiler Collection wiped out an entire industry. Nothing was stolen though.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  6. Obelia

    Obelia Guest

    Messages:
    2,084
    Likes Received:
    171
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #26
    Wikipedia is supposed to cite its references, but all too often there are articles that don't do this. So you can have ordinary webmasters working very hard to compile original articles, and when someone puts the same information up without attribution, the content creator loses out.
     
    Obelia, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  7. my44

    my44 Peon

    Messages:
    722
    Likes Received:
    24
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #27
    The way I see it is that Wikipedia is a cheap and fast way to ride on a PageRank 7/8/9/10. It definitely opens for abuse. Where else you can find a "website" with high PageRank that people can freely tag their outbound link. I wouldn't allow it on my PR5 sites. Wikipedia must feel that way, eventually.
     
    my44, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  8. nathan76

    nathan76 Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #28
    The same can be said about personal computers and typewriters and many other inventions. However all these were replaced with better devices, and I think jury is still out on quality and legality of Wikipedia's invention, as it is out on Google's idea to scan and publish books online. I see both good and bad in that, and if it becomes apparent that Wikipedia's business makes serious research and independent online journalism unprofitable, there might be legal challenges.

    I also think Wikipedia's decision to use "no follow" links is arrogant to say the least. It is like telling legitimate web publishers: "We know we can use your information for free, but we want to make sure you do not get any PR boost from us in return, since you might be one of those "for profit" sites." By that Wikipedia essentially acknowledges that many of their links are to the sites, whose sole purpose is to make easy money. With "no follow" links, publishers of "fake" web sites have even more incentive to get their links on Wikipedia, because they can still make money from traffic. Correct me if I am wrong.
     
    nathan76, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  9. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #29
    Journalism has other problems and it would take much more than Wikipedia to crack the journal publishing industry. I doubt even Bill Gates could do that. The federal government is having a go in a narrow area but even they are running into significant opposition.

    No it is telling Google and the like that we see no reason why we should sweat away to help them give more relevant results (it also follows Google’s guidelines but that wasn't really something that was considered).

    Wikipedia has no problem with that. Even the licence it is under allows commercial reuse.

    Wikipedia also takes information from books, journals and newspapers. We couldn't give them page rank even if we wanted to.

    It reduces the number of people trying to add vanity links and well every little helps.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  10. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #30
    Interdentally the above is one of the people you want to blame if you object to Wikipedia going no follow.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  11. jackar000

    jackar000 Peon

    Messages:
    268
    Likes Received:
    12
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #31
    I don't think that using nofollow is against Google webmaster guidelines
     
    jackar000, Feb 12, 2007 IP
    Icheb likes this.
  12. john269

    john269 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,229
    Likes Received:
    116
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    185
    #32
    The chances of that is very slim. The reasons for this is because as far as I know Google and the other major search egines came together and actually invented this No Follow link thing so that sites use it on things like blogs and things to help them prevent webmasters spamming their sites just for link benefits and PR gain. This in returns helps the search engines because it stops alot of webmasters spamming just to get better rankings.
     
    john269, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  13. trichnosis

    trichnosis Notable Member

    Messages:
    13,779
    Likes Received:
    333
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    250
    #33
    i dont think that google or the other search engines wil ban the wikipedia . in my opinion , your idea is crap ;) not real
     
    trichnosis, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  14. Icheb

    Icheb Peon

    Messages:
    1,092
    Likes Received:
    31
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #34
    You, Sir, are a genius. Green rep added for this pearl of wisdom.
     
    Icheb, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  15. nathan76

    nathan76 Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #35
    OK, I understand. I just hope the feud between two companies does not evolve into a collective punishment for their users.
     
    nathan76, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  16. nathan76

    nathan76 Peon

    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #36
    Technically, one can imagine a writer or a scientist counting his/her online citations, including those in Wikipedia, and using them to increase personal citation index.
     
    nathan76, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  17. C4supplements

    C4supplements Active Member

    Messages:
    294
    Likes Received:
    2
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    53
    #37
    Being a newbie and trying to follow all sides in this thread, I think this is an excellent point. It seems logical that much less quality content would be submitted if there was not the bonus of a link. Or is wiki already so huge that this will not really effect anything?
     
    C4supplements, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  18. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #38
    German wikipedia has had nofollow forever. It's pretty good. In some ways better than english.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  19. geni

    geni Peon

    Messages:
    83
    Likes Received:
    0
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #39
    No impact on users. Annoys a few people who are trying to exploit wikipedia but they are free to fork.
     
    geni, Feb 12, 2007 IP
  20. AZhitman

    AZhitman Active Member

    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    31
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    70
    #40
    Well, we're removing our submissions.

    Not all people who contributed to that dung-heap were looking to "exploit" Wikipedia, I have a nice PR already. We're all about helping those who need info.

    However, if they're so pompous as to disallow a simple citation of source, screw them. I've just added a script to add nofollow to every Wikipedia link on my site as well.
     
    AZhitman, Feb 12, 2007 IP
    Obelia likes this.