On 01/05/07, Joe Szilagyi <szilagyi(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 5/1/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> If you're henceforth going to put something
into place for the express
> purpose of using the power of nofollow, I'd suggest a determination on
> the basis of whether the interwiki site is free content. (See WMF
> objectives.)
Is it a stated objective (link, please) to promote
external websites or
corporations materially or incidentally? I'm curious for a clarification of
what you are saying. Thanks!
http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home
"The Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. is a nonprofit charitable organization
dedicated to encouraging the growth, development and distribution of
free, multilingual content, and to providing the full content of these
wiki-based projects to the public free of charge."
This would most definitely be "encouraging the growth, development and
distribution" of free content.
When I get press calls with the latest "let's you and him fight" news
about Citizendium, I point out that encouraging free content sites in
general is actually good for us in every way. It validates the model
and it validates free content.
If Google juice from Wikipedia is as all-fired superpowered as
linkspammers claim, it would be negligent of us not to use this force
for good.
(That, by the way, would mean distinguishing which Wikia sites get
nofollow, e.g. most are GFDL, but Uncyclopedia is CC by-nc-sa, so
wouldn't get a boost.)
- d.