Comments on: Wikipedia crap

By: jerry vadr

jerry vadr — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 08:46:48 +0000

jsut an added note:
here’s an artciel that’s on wikiepdia (i checked, it’s exactly as it is elsewhere) about someone who lost his job over a hoax.. somone he knew played a joke and editted wikipedia pages twith false information that got this guy fired.
It wasn’t picked up by anyone for 4 months
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Chase_(Wikipedia_hoaxer)

By: jerry vadr

jerry vadr — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 08:28:21 +0000

wikipedia (and all wiki sites) are crap anyway. Anyone can edit them, usualy with rumors and false infomration, the admins don’t know whats true or not, they want ‘citations’, yet, the ‘citations needed’ stays for weeks while it’s idnex on search engines, and people find the false info and believe it.
People replce pictures with porn, that aren’t removed for at least 7 days or someone happens to remove it, which by then, some little kid already had a good look at it.
The admins, and majority of edittors are rude, obnoxious morons who think they know everything there is to know, and I’ve proven more than a dozen of them wrong in arguements over the music biz. and articles about the artists (as I work in the industry with the artists).
anyone who considers wikpedia reliable neds their head examined closely by a professional.
as for the linking back.. what does it matter if they put a nofollow in it or not? someone will always come along and remove the link jsut because they dont like it there, or it’s competition for their own link anyway. If you want to visit the pages your link is on to put it back every 10 minutes, that’s your choice, I have better things to do (and my sites, which I have several official and non-official celebrity homepages and fan clubs) rank higher than wikipedia, and I block all links to wiki sites
I refuse to allow links to sites that have created more rumors and panicing fans thinking the new album they saw on a wiki page was true when it’s not than I can actually count (it’s a weekly occurance for me).

By: Stéphane Lee

Stéphane Lee — Tue, 30 Jan 2007 04:07:09 +0000

There could have been a compromise like:
freshly added links are with nofollow and when the links age (over a month for example), the nofollow tag could be removed.

By: Avinash Meetoo

Avinash Meetoo — Mon, 29 Jan 2007 13:53:05 +0000

On the other hand, this is one of the only ways to nullify the problems of comment spam on a wiki. I can’t think of anything else they could do (except perhaps having categories of links where links submitted by a long-time user won’t have the nofollow attribute but can this work?)