Spotted this full-page ad on p. 2 of the June 2007 issue of Design World magazine:
WIKIPEDIA: MECHATRONICS
[picture of rock band stage with instrumentation control components as musical instruments]
Yaskawa set the stage in 1969... and you thought Woodstock was groovy!
In 1969, Yaskawa created the term "Mechatronics" to encompass electronics, mechanics, and control. The philosophy of Mechatronics has grown in popularity ever since.
For almost 40 years, the Mechatronics culture of Yaskawa...
[more copy removed]
For more information on Mechatronics, visit the Wikipedia Web site.
1-800-YASKAWA � www.yaskawa.com Servomotors � Motion controllers � AC inverter drives � Robotics
YASKAWA The Drive for Quality (tm)
This is sorta flattering on one level, but worrisome on a couple of others...
They're sending people to Wikipedia to find out more about their product? I feel like I should have a problem with this, but I can't think of one. A quick glance at the history of the appropriate article doesn't show any obvious spamming. There is an element of it appearing that Wikipedia is somehow endorsing the product, but I don't think it's a major element.
I think this is probably just free publicity for us...
On 7/2/07, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
They're sending people to Wikipedia to find out more about their product? I feel like I should have a problem with this, but I can't think of one. A quick glance at the history of the appropriate article doesn't show any obvious spamming. There is an element of it appearing that Wikipedia is somehow endorsing the product, but I don't think it's a major element.
I think this is probably just free publicity for us...
Like we need it. :-) ~~~~
Thomas Dalton wrote:
They're sending people to Wikipedia to find out more about their product? I feel like I should have a problem with this, but I can't think of one. A quick glance at the history of the appropriate article doesn't show any obvious spamming. There is an element of it appearing that Wikipedia is somehow endorsing the product, but I don't think it's a major element.
Indeed, I think this could actually be quite positive depending on the details of their involvement with writing the article itself. "We've got a good product, and to prove it we'll direct you to a site that's outside our control and that has a strict policy of neutrality." Sort of like referring people to one's Better Business Bureau profile.
It's also possible that they were just too lazy or cheap to write their own "about us" page and sufficiently aware of copyright law that they didn't want to just rip us off. :)
Bryan Derksen wrote:
Thomas Dalton wrote:
They're sending people to Wikipedia to find out more about their product? I feel like I should have a problem with this, but I can't think of one. A quick glance at the history of the appropriate article doesn't show any obvious spamming. There is an element of it appearing that Wikipedia is somehow endorsing the product, but I don't think it's a major element.
Indeed, I think this could actually be quite positive depending on the details of their involvement with writing the article itself. "We've got a good product, and to prove it we'll direct you to a site that's outside our control and that has a strict policy of neutrality." Sort of like referring people to one's Better Business Bureau profile.
What better endorsement is there than the truth? A lot of people will mistrust a company's own website. For food products we can carry ingredients lists and vitamin contents without requiring the consumer to use a microscope to read the packaging.. If the company uploads bullshit it could be in for a very rough ride.
Ec