[Commons-l] Commons search engine ranking, Was: Killing the main namespace?
Yann Forget
yann at forget-me.net
Mon Jan 29 18:24:58 UTC 2007
Gregory Maxwell a écrit :
> On 1/29/07, Yann Forget <yann at forget-me.net> wrote:
>
>>>I think galleries are useful. I do not think they should be deleted.
>>>Instead, I think we should make a new namespace called "gallery" and
>>>move all the galleries there.
>>
>>Well I understand, but I am not sure what is the benefit expected here
>>with the deletion of many pages from main namespace, and I don't see how
>>it will be achieved.
>
> We would automatically mass move all the pages with galleries to the
> gallery namespace. Deletion could also be done automatically.
I understand what you want to do, but what benefit you expect from such
a change.
>>Commons is generally very badly referenced.
>>I think this is mainly because of the category system (maybe developers
>>could give more hints here). For "Mohandas Gandhi" in Google Images, you
>> won't find any images directly from Commons. That's very surprising
>>seeing that Commons is now the biggest source of free (as in beer)
>>images of Gandhi.
>
> The biggest factor for this is that most search engines will not index
> pages with names which look like image names, for example
> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Foo.jpg. They would index
> Image:Foo but our image pages are not named like that.
>
> Since most of the time when other sites (including Wikimedia's own)
> link to commons they link to image pages, we do not gain 'googlejuice'
> from those links.
>
> There are a lot of things we could do to enhance the popularity of
> commons, but the page name issue really should be solved first.
>
> It's in the long term plans for mediawiki to support filenames which
> are unrelated to the file type.... but even using that will require
> massive renames on commons. Does anyone have any suggestions? There
> are a lot of possibilities.
>
> Another question is.. are we ready to handle an increase in public visibility?
Good question. Yes, this should be addressed fist obviously.
Regards,
Yann
More information about the Commons-l
mailing list