Just yesterday, Jimmy Wales and his crew were outed for their secret mailing list used, amongst other things, to plot against their own contributors: http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/04/0333252

The signs have been there for all to see for quite a while now… it’s about time people realized what’s really happening!

And on a similar note: http://neosmart.net/blog/2007/wikias-outrageous-exploitation-of-the-human-race/
Same thing, same people behind it, just a different name.

Maybe someone will pay me for my content like Answers.com pays Wikpedia for theirs!

“…Wikipedia and Answers.com will split advertising revenue from the Answers.com website from users utilizing the software. This is expected to commence in January 2006, starting with a 60-day trial period.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-10-24/Answers.com_partnership

hahahahaha

Seriously, they’ve seemed comparable to nazi’s. “You can not do this! Only we can do this! We are all that is good and all who are not with us will be punished!”

It has sacrificed the premise of truth for the premise of “concensus” (but there are ways around that, too, if you’re “made”). Thinly-veiled propagandists pretty much own all remotely politicized topics, and the taint can only spread.

Wikipedia insteading of attacking the source, has gone and attacked the symptom. I wonder how many spammers will stop spamming because of this!

Tho I understand your point of view, I see it differently. I believe that what we get and what we should expect to get from wikipedia is not SEO, but knowledge.

However, - without reading Jimmy Wales’ opinion on the subject - I don’t understand their way of thinking.

In other words, Wikipedia is nothing without the community, and as such, it has no right to abuse the community’s kindness and help in such a way.

We may still be getting the traffic, but we don’t get the SEO rankings. For instance, we’re linked in Wikipedia all over the place with reference to Windows Vista articles. If you go to the Windows Vista article, you can follow a link to our site. But the problem arises when you search for a Vista-related article.

It used to be that if your post was linked in Wikipedia, you’d show up on Google when you search for a related term. Wikipedia has a very high “link quality” factor, meaning that if you were linked from Wikipedia, your chances of being higher-up in a Google search were bigger, and that was fair. After all, if you’re worthy of being linked in an encyclopedia, are you not worthy of being in a Google search too?

But now being linked to from an encyclopedia doesn’t give your blog more “credability” on Google & Co. Instead, it’s as if you were never even linked to in the first place!