[WikiEN-l] Re: [Foundation-l] Most read US newpaper blasts Wikipedia

[geni]

On 11/30/05, slimvirgin at gmail.com <slimvirgin at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/30/05, Fred Bauder <fredbaud at ctelco.net> wrote:
> > This case Slim Virgin mentions is in arbitration now and a blatant
> > example of gaming Google by associating the name of the person with a
> > lot of accusations he has only a marginal connection with ...
> > At a minimum we need to not allow Google to index our talk pages. We
> > talk about a lot of things. They may be about information but they
> > are not encyclopedic.
>
> Fred, the case I was referring to isn't the one that's in arbitration,
> though I know the one you mean, and it's quite similar. I'm starting
> to wonder whether this is happening a lot: that troublemakers see our
> talk pages as a sort of Trojan horse. They pretend to be having an
> innocent conversation designed to sort out the good from the bad
> material, whereas in fact the discussion is only a vehicle being used
> to spread the bad stuff, which they know won't survive in our
> articles.
>
> Sarah

I'm seeing it a fair bit in certain areas. I haven't seen linkspam
hitting talkpages yet but it probably will soon. The problem is that
it will be most effective on low profile talk pages (ie ones likely to
be at the top of google searches) where we are least likely to notice.

--
geni