On 8/21/06, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 8/20/06, Anthony <wikilegal(a)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