Hoi, As far as leeches go, this takes the price as far as I am concerned. It sells scripts to leech any Wikimedia project and all this to have the rating of a website go up.
Is this the kind of outfit that we act upon .. That is for you to decide.. Thanks, GerardM
I'm CCing this to Mike Godwin (I'm not sure he's on this list).
That site is full of our trademarks (names and logos) being used for commercial gain. Something probably should be done about it.
On 26 February 2010 15:30, Gerard Meijssen [email protected] wrote:
Hoi, As far as leeches go, this takes the price as far as I am concerned. It sells scripts to leech any Wikimedia project and all this to have the rating of a website go up.
Is this the kind of outfit that we act upon .. That is for you to decide.. Thanks, GerardM
http://wikigalore.com/ _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Gerard Meijssen writes,
As far as leeches go, this takes the price as far as I am concerned. It sells scripts to leech any Wikimedia project and all this to have the rating of a website go up.
The best long-term solution would be to work with Google and other search engines to encourage them to efficiently recognize Wikimedia content and reduce rankings of sites mirroring it just for SEO.
It wouldn't make much sense to leech Wikimedia if it adversely affected site rankings.
Pete
On 27 February 2010 00:48, Peter Kaminski [email protected] wrote:
Gerard Meijssen writes,
As far as leeches go, this takes the price as far as I am concerned. It sells scripts to leech any Wikimedia project and all this to have the rating of a website go up.
The best long-term solution would be to work with Google and other search engines to encourage them to efficiently recognize Wikimedia content and reduce rankings of sites mirroring it just for SEO.
It wouldn't make much sense to leech Wikimedia if it adversely affected site rankings.
*cough*But... these sites make a service to wikipedia and the public in general, creating multiple mirrors of articles. If wikipedia is down, you can still read the articles elsewhere, if the articles are deleted, you can read these articles on these sites*cough*
Peter Kaminski wrote:
The best long-term solution would be to work with Google and other search engines to encourage them to efficiently recognize Wikimedia content and reduce rankings of sites mirroring it just for SEO.
I've heard that Google have looked at ways to downrank mirrors, but they don't think it's ethical to just penalise everything with a domain name that doesn't end in wikipedia.org. As far as I'm aware, the most obvious heuristic, "covered in spammy ads", was not considered. Presumably that could risk damaging their bottom line.
Tei wrote:
*cough*But... these sites make a service to wikipedia and the public in general, creating multiple mirrors of articles. If wikipedia is down, you can still read the articles elsewhere, if the articles are deleted, you can read these articles on these sites*cough*
The script in question is a proxy, not a mirror. Look, I can take it down for you right now just by tweaking our squid configuration...
Better?
-- Tim Starling
"Tim Starling" [email protected] wrote in message news:[email protected]...
The script in question is a proxy, not a mirror. Look, I can take it down for you right now just by tweaking our squid configuration...
Better?
WIN!! :-D
--HM