On 30/04/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Do you see an ethical conflict that financial donors
to Wikipedia (Wikia)
are on the Interwiki map? If not, why?
I can't say I care. Obviously that won't be sufficient for you, but
that doesn't make me care.
Do you see the conflict that the developers (who are
close to Jimmy) turned
down Bainer's patch that would have fixed all this? If SEO and pagerank
don't matter, why endorse something that benefits other sites? Why not
ensure no one gets the magic Wikigoogle juice?
Your first line appears to be part of the myth that this is the cult
of Jimbo and all are under his control. Brion wanted nofollow on all
wikis and only left it off en:wp with much grumbling.
Did you actually read the reasons for rejecting the patch? Interwiki
links are unlikely to be spam.
It sounds like you haven't actually read the
instructions on the
> interwiki map or its talk page but aren't letting ignorance stop your
> valuable opinion
And that was artful political/PR spin, as Jeff said.
Well played. Attack the
innocent messenger, if no satisfactory answer exists. Well done.
If your mission is to get nofollow on all links to Wikia sites, I
suggest you come up with a reason it's for the good of the first party
(Wikipedia/Wikimedia) or the second party (the readers). Arguments
concerning third parties (search engine spammers) or the whim of
fourth parties (Google) are unlikely to convince, from observation.