Comments on: Wikipedia on Life Support; Would You Miss It?

By: A-E-I-Owned-You

A-E-I-Owned-You — Sat, 24 May 2008 21:58:25 +0000

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?

By: Femke

Femke — Fri, 06 Apr 2007 20:03:28 +0000

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.

By: jennifer jones

jennifer jones — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:52:20 +0000

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.

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 15:21:56 +0000

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.

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 14:30:55 +0000

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.

By: Mateosquared

Mateosquared — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 13:43:06 +0000

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.

By: paul lomax

paul lomax — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:22:04 +0000

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!

By: graywolf

graywolf — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 02:41:42 +0000

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

By: Headlines of Note for February 12, 2007

Headlines of Note for February 12, 2007 — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:50:36 +0000

[...] Is Wikipedia really 3 – 4 months away from going under? Doubtful. And if it did, Marketing Pilgrim wonders if you'd miss it? Lisa Barone wishes it would go under. I seriously, seriously doubt Wikipedia will shut down any time soon. Someone will either give them more money or buy their servers or something. I'd have mixed feelings about a Wikipedia shut down. On one hand I'd love to see something else show up in the search engine results. But on the other hand I'd miss Wikipedia as an acronym definer. Search Love Triangle [Truncated title] (Search Engine Land) [...]

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:42:02 +0000

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.

By: 97th Floor

97th Floor — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 22:08:37 +0000

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.

By: Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:48:00 +0000

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?

By: Jeremy Swiller

Jeremy Swiller — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 21:28:55 +0000

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.

By: Andy Beal

Andy Beal — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:46:20 +0000

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

By: Jestep

Jestep — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:36:19 +0000

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.

By: Matt Siltala

Matt Siltala — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 20:16:18 +0000

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

By: jmnlman

jmnlman — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:58:22 +0000

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.

By: Jarrod Hunt

Jarrod Hunt — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:41:43 +0000

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.

By: CPCcurmudgeon

CPCcurmudgeon — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 18:24:56 +0000

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.

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 12 Feb 2007 17:59:17 +0000

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.