PDA

View Full Version : wikipedia - the new dmoz headache



LuckyShima
09-18-2005, 03:51 AM
Some years ago it seemed like dmoz would become some sort of standard for the web, as though we wouldn't need search engines because everything we needed would be sorted in dmoz. Fortunately this has not happened and a listing in dmoz does not seem as important as it once was.

Now along comes another headache, wikipedia. Wikipedia is now attempting to cover every single topic known to man. the army of ants who were rejecting my sites at dmoz now have a new hobby updating wikipedia. The extent they will go to can be seen at this page:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_Idol

where someone is providing weekly updates on the Australian Idol reality tv show.

At another section I have a link to one of my sites from a wikipedia entry, which funnily enough is actually an incorrect link (they seem to think they are linking to something that they are not).

Worst of all, wikipedia is starting to pop up in the searches for my main search terms. It is starting to be a competitor to me. And what really bugs me is that it seems to have entries that have been optimised for the search engines.

The sooner Google puts a penalty on wikipedia the better, otherwise the internet risks becoming just a wikipedia index.

Cutter
09-18-2005, 08:26 AM
But unlike DMOZ, anyone can edit a wikipedia entry. I really like DMOZ because you can find up-to-date information on virtually anything with one search.

This means you can add your own links as long as your site doesn't look too commercial. On top of that, answers.com and other sites mirror the content. I actually get quite a bit of traffic from wiki.

Chris
09-18-2005, 08:29 AM
and anyone can delete someone else's edit

Cutter
09-18-2005, 09:28 AM
I've only had something I added deleted once, and that was a Doom 3 review on my game site.

polspoel
09-18-2005, 10:06 AM
It sickens me that you find wikipedia to be _bad_ for the internet (or your profits). Make better sites and stop complaining.

Chris
09-18-2005, 10:33 AM
I don't think you get the concept of editor abuse polspoel

LuckyShima
09-18-2005, 02:07 PM
It sickens me that you find wikipedia to be _bad_ for the internet (or your profits). Make better sites and stop complaining.
If something like that sickens you then you must find watching the nightly news to be a major life trauma.

LuckyShima
09-18-2005, 02:15 PM
But unlike DMOZ, anyone can edit a wikipedia entry. I really like DMOZ because you can find up-to-date information on virtually anything with one search.
(I think you meant you 'really like wiki') - This is my point, the internet risks becoming a wikipedia index, wikipedia provides information on just about everything with one search.

This means you can add your own links as long as your site doesn't look too commercial. Yes I might have to give this some more thought. Although I don't like it overall, I should really think about how to make the most of it while it is having this influence.

On top of that, answers.com and other sites mirror the content. I actually get quite a bit of traffic from wiki.I am getting some traffic from wiki from the incorrect link I mentioned, but I am currently above wiki in the rankings. I am just concerned that wiki might get ahead of me in the rankings for a couple of little entries with massive inter-linking and the apparent optimisation of the titles.

Cutter
09-18-2005, 03:37 PM
Honestly, I think web publishing is a bigger threat to wikipedia than wikipedia is to us.

No one is paid. You've got some very smart people who are pretty much just pumping pure cash into the pockets of the guys at answers.com and SE spammer -- maybe I'm wrong, but I don't think these dedicated guys really understand this concept right now.

The way I see it there isn't a damn thing I can do that will change wikipedia or get rid of it, so I just look for ways it will benefit me.

Here is another thing, there are some SE spammers who are scraping links off of wikipedia for their spam sites. One of my sites got 75% of its traffic from some spammer who put my link on everyone of their couple hundred pages.

jaybird691
09-18-2005, 05:01 PM
I have never used content from Wiki on my site. I was wondering how many people here do. I have seen some sites that do use the content but then it would appear that there are just thousands of sites with the exact same content. What are your thoughts on this? I try to write original content but it obviously would be easier to use alot of this type of material in a site such as mine about history. Comments on the use of Wiki content and ideas for using it in an original way would be welcome. Thanks

Cutter
09-18-2005, 06:14 PM
Personally, I wouldn't use their content but if you do make sure you follow the license: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Text_of_the_GNU_Free_Documentation_Licen se

LuckyShima
09-18-2005, 06:33 PM
I have a site containing some highly specialised information, including specialised information on one page that as far as I could tell was the ONLY place on the Net where this information had been collected and presented in the way I was doing it.

This information now appears in a wikipedia entry.

But wikipedia has an advantage over me because 'it' or 'they' have no legal liability so they can do things like display trademarks without authorisation which I cannot do.

My advice to you is therefore that you are totally wasting your time building content sites. My experience is with information where it was only displayed in one place, on my website, and this has now been duplicated on Wikipedia. Every form of content you develop risks being duplicated on Wikipedia.

You should use Wikipedia source to build lots of websites that would otherwise have been your content sites, maybe adding some text so it avoids duplicate content penalty, then hope that something is done about this and you can go back and fill in your own content on the sites that you have listed.

r2d2
09-19-2005, 12:13 AM
I was wondering how many people here do.

I use Wiki content on my cooking site (http://www.cookery-online.co.uk/) and DIY site (http://www.home-improvement-online.co.uk/). Just a simple way of adding some content to an AWS site - I dont want to spend hours/$$ on content for an AWS site.

MarkB
09-19-2005, 05:03 AM
I've used it in the past, and plan to in the future.

John
09-19-2005, 05:17 AM
Would it even be worth using on a content site since it would get hit with duplicate content?

MarkB
09-19-2005, 05:48 AM
Well, I don't use it word-for-word, but it's an easy basis for content.