On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 11:46 PM, Risker risker.wp@gmail.com wrote:
Well, here's the problem. When I google-search "Verifiability", the first hit is the Wikipedia policy - it isn't even our article on formal verification (redirected from "Verifiability), or any other link on Wikipedia or elsewhere that describes what verifiability is in the real world. "Naming convention" shows our article first, our policy second, and then all the other real-world information about naming conventions after that. "Arbitration policy" again shows a #1 google-hit direct to our policy. "Copyright violations" takes us first to the Wikipedia article, and second to our Category of possible copyright violations. "Basic dignity" - a fairly common term - first hit is our essay. (And this was just a random sample.)
I don't think we should assume what people want to find when they search for things. That is not Wikipedia's job, but googles. I bet when most people search for "arbitration policy" they are looking for Wikipedia, for example. Regardless that's a fairly unrealistic search phrase. The rest are fine too, "naming conventions", why shouldn't the biggest online published of free information's naming conventions come up first in that search? Who's conventions would be more appropriate?
Our rankings for policies, guidelines and essays are all out of proportion to their importance in the real world, and frankly should not be the first hit for someone looking for general information on the subject. They should definitely be available for searching within Wikipedia, but they do not need to be in the top-10 google hits - ever. They pertain only to the process of editing Wikipedia and have no bearing on any other aspect of the world.
Says you. I'm sure a lot of researchers, sociologists, wikipedians, and the curious would disagree.