In a message dated 4/27/2008 8:53:05 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, dgoodmanny@gmail.com writes:
Having our user pages searchable puts us on a level with , or below, facebook. They at least let people have public and non public content.>>
--------------------- But are you proposing a situation where the users can have *no* public content? Or are you proposing excluding User page from this global proposal to hide non-mainspace?
Will
**************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos. (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 10:07 PM, WJhonson@aol.com wrote:
But are you proposing a situation where the users can have *no* public content? Or are you proposing excluding User page from this global proposal to hide non-mainspace?
Wikipedia user pages are not supposed to be a place where one publishes information for the whole Internet to read. They're not personal homepages, not personal web space.
That said, what I'd really like is some way to tell Google et al. that only encyclopedia-space pages are deserving of a high page ranking. The reputation of our actual content is incorrectly spread across pages that are our work in progress or our internal policies. As someone pointed out, WIkipedia's policy pages on copyright should not be high-ranked Google results when people search for 'copyright'.
-Matt
As an aside, I note that there is an ongoing discussion on Foundation-L about whether or not to allow Google to crawl their archives. It seems there is considerable concern about the fact Google has, in the past, highly ranked arcane and incidental discussions and thus the list does not permit robots.txt harvesting; early responses are that the membership of that list does not wish to change it, pointing out that anyone who wants to read the archives is welcome to do so, or even to participate by signing up for the list.
Risker