Marketing Pilgrim's "Social Media" Channel

Sponsor Marketing Pilgrim's Social Media Channel today! Get in front of some of the most influential readers in the Internet and social media marketing industry. Contact us today!
by
26 Comments

Wikipedia on Life Support; Would You Miss It?

posted on February 12, 2007


Jason “I love SEO” Calacanis brings to light, news that Wikipedia has only enough funds to last 3-4 months. He believes that a few hard-core Wikipedians are being stubborn, by not considering advertising on the site.

I find it really ironic that a certain percentage (and I’m not gonna give percentages anymore) of the Wikipedia core team feel that they should decide for the entire Wikipedia audience the advertising policy….What happen to consensus people…80% of people would opt to see an advertisement and the vocal minority that controls Wikipedia with an iron fist/IRC channel will block it.

Thoughts? Would you be happy to have Wikipedia continue, even if it meant ignoring tolerating some ads? Would you even miss Wikipedia if it went away?


Related Posts

Zemanta
  • http://www.jasonblogs.com Jason Schramm

    In light of wikipedia’s push towards nofollow, and the fact that content on wikipedia can be stolen from other places, I would say good riddance. As a graduating college senior I have learned to not rely on wikipedia for reliable information. Ask.com often gives accurate responses anyway.

  • http://www.seorefugee.com SEOrefugee

    I’d say, after they nofollowed all the external links, Good Riddance to (now) Bad Rubbish!

  • http://www.archiseek.com/ Paul Clerkin

    As someone who consistently finds my original content and photographs on Wikipedia, I wouldn’t miss it in the slightest. Personally i think the ‘net would be a better place if all those who generated content for Wikipedia would do so for themselves. More independent retailers, less Wal-mart.

  • agerhart

    Good riddance

  • http://www.srclarke.com Todd Mintz

    Flawed as it is, I think Wikipedia serves a useful purpose and I agree with Jason C. on this one (even though he’s dead wrong about SEO).

  • http://seo-theory.blogspot.com/ Michael Martinez

    As one of the greatest sources of misinformation and biased propaganda on the Internet, Wikipedia should be shut down immediately.

    Please, God, let it die quickly and irrevocably. We don’t need their nonsense.

  • http://www.sierrawebmarketers.blogspot.com Mike

    I would miss it greatly, so would my kids.
    FWIW, my teen kids and their friends use Wikipedia above all other reference sites. I asked them what they thought about Answers.com and they would not hear of it!
    They would not give a rip if it offered advertising.
    Why don’t they anyway, they need to grow up I think.

  • http://gregbo.livejournal.com/ CPCcurmudgeon

    I would miss it. I guess I have been fortunate that the information I
    get from it is reliable and properly attributed when obtained from
    some{one,where} else.

  • http://www.textlinkbrokers.com Jarrod Hunt

    Although there are times that it may be inaccurate, it is still a better reference then some sources, and I use it frequently.

    It would be missed.

    They should put up a few ads and then use that money to support editors.

  • http://jmnlman.blogspot.com/ jmnlman

    but if it shuts down then were will the Napoleon wannabes go? My favorite was the comment in one of the discussion pages about how Wikipedia isn’t about truth only the truth that can be “liberated” from other sources.

  • http://www.eplanit.biz/blog Matt Siltala

    I say let it, and its nofollow links die quickly!

  • http://www.merchantaccountblog.com Jestep

    Wikipedia is super convenient, but it offers no merit on how accurate any given article may be. This is why every graduate and post-graduate reference requirement that I have seen, explicitly prohibits using it as a reference.

    The other thing that I hate, is that no credit is given when it is very often due.

    Putting the nofollow blunder aside, I have seen authors write amazing, completely objective and accurate articles on wikipedia, only to have them cannabalized by meta editors and competing persons in that field.

    The whole system is massively flawed, and in hopes of preventing another dmoz like failure, I would love to see it go down.

  • http://www.marketingpilgrim.com Andy Beal

    Of course, if they closed doors, I’d have to think of a new “nofollow” campaign. ;-)

  • http://www.searchenginelowdown.com Jeremy Swiller

    It’s ignorant to think that another site wouldn’t take it’s place as an information portal.

    I love the idea of Wikipedia from a CGM standpoint, but they are foolish not to take advantage of all of the eyeballs that they receive. Many “trusted” websites make millions from advertising dollars. And Wikipedia would not be selling out if they joined suit.

    Banner ads are very different from Text Link Ads or Pay Per Post.

    BUT, no, I wouldn’t miss it.

  • http://seo-theory.blogspot.com/ Michael Martinez

    Wikipedia over answers.com. Well, now I’ve heard everything. I wonder how much difference there actually is between the two sites.

    And what will happen to the Wikiclones if Ickipedia goes down?

  • http://www.ninetyseventhfloor.com/blog 97th Floor

    no follow aside I won’t miss it, and I never used it. There are so many other places to get real info. I say close it down.

  • http://www.sierrawebmarketers.blogspot.com Mike

    Answers.com is much more detailed and better presented however I was forwarding views of teens in my realm. Honors type kids who tell me Wikipedia is the site of choice for quick reference. It’s not just my kids and their friends, I get the sense from them it’s universal among high schoolers. Only Wikipedia would know this by their demo’s.

  • Pingback: Headlines of Note for February 12, 2007

  • http://www.wolf-howl.com graywolf

    Well if Google would just shut off the traffic to the wiki I bet a lot of their money problems would go away.

  • http://twopointoh.wordpress.com paul lomax

    All the content is licensed under GDFL, and the mediawiki software is open source.

    So what’s to miss? If anybody likes it that much, just launch your own ad supported version… It works for answers.com!

  • http://www.mateosquared.com/isearch Mateosquared

    It should go away. It is undeniably one of the most biased, inaccurate informational sites on the Web. They are a bunch of pedantic, ivory tower, navel gazing “people” who do not particularly care about the growth of the Internet or the user experience. There are better sites such as Answers and Questia which offer reliable information that can be verified.

  • http://www.clickblurbs.com Rob

    Sure, on most days Calcanis comes off as an arrogant jackass.

    But he’s spot on about Wiki. It is flawed, but it does serve a purpose. I would miss it, if nothing more because it has become the Cliff Claven of the Internet. :)

  • http://www.marketingpilgrim.com Andy Beal

    Wow. I really thought a lot more people would comment in favor of Wikipedia’s chosen path. I guess they probably pissed off a lot of people with their nofollow action.

  • http://www.podtech.net jennifer jones

    I would miss wikipedia for sure. It is informative and great for looking up people and their backgrounds in a quick and easy format. My kids use it a lot too.

  • Femke

    Good riddance to it!! So much of my site’s content has been stolen by wikipedia users I’ve almost given up on web publishing. Years and years of work lost to copy-and-paste experts! My site’s ranking has plumetted as a result — why bother with it when most of its been transferred to wiki. I tried policing it for a while, but doing that devours so much time. Its both exhausting and demoralizing.
    I think Wikipedia is the death knell of many small information sites, as their content is gradually assimilated into the megalith. Not to mention a huge discouragement for those thinking of establishing a new website.

  • A-E-I-Owned-You

    Wiki is inaccurate and considered a joke. Any idiot can say whatever they want about something and its posted as fact. Some of the info may be valid, but who knows?

Filed Under: Social