On 8/21/06, Steve Bennett stevagewp@gmail.com wrote:
On 8/20/06, Anthony wikilegal@inbox.org wrote:
I'd phrase it as "I removed a possibly defamatory claim because it was unsourced [link to diff]". What's materially changed is that the claim is a bit more hidden, and probably more importantly, that the claim won't show up in a google search (as diff pages are under the robots exclusion).
It's also just cleaner and easier (IMO). Why copy/paste the claim when you can just link to it?
If the goal is to get stuff out of google, why don't we just nospider the talk pages? Is there any reason to have them spidered?
Having talk pages in google has advantages and disadvantages. The main advantage is that it makes it easier to search for things on talk pages, as Wikipedia's search facilities still kind of suck.
I'd be in favor of taking talk pages out of google, but I think it'd meet from resistance by others. It could also be argued that putting parts of Wikipedia under robots.txt constitutes "technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute" and violates the GFDL.
Anthony