Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 7:26 AM, Carcharothcarcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: That's a very good idea. +1 The name strikes me as the biggest drawback of the current system. Carcharoth On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 11:36 AM, FT2ft2.w...@gmail.com wrote: I think there's a terminology issue. We cannot refer to this as a trust system, however Wikitrust brands it. We just can't. It misleads too many, and implies too much. Call it a text tracing system or a gadget to highlight text origins instead. It's a lot less glamorous, sounds alot less dramatic, doesn't get the dollars - but it's got zero capability of misleading. FT2 On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 8:37 PM, James Alexander jameso...@gmail.comwrote: How would the blame maps work with people editing around vandalism? For example someone either blanks the page or does extensive vandalism to it (especially over the course of a couple days or a couple users). I would imagine it would be fairly easy if the bad contributions just got rolledback but would the old blamemaps still be reinstated if someone went in and manually copy/pasted the old version (or something very close) in or would the system count it as a new contribution? On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 3:12 PM, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/8/31 David Goodman dgoodma...@gmail.com: I am a little concerned that we are adopting a metric into our interface without adequate testing. It appears we're not and Wired completely jumped the gun. There is no timeframe for release of this thing even as an optional extra. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- James Alexander http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jamesofur ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text
On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 8:31 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.comwrote: On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Brianbrian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: On Sun, Aug 30, 2009 at 9:08 PM, Carcharoth carcharot...@googlemail.com wrote: snip Is it not more likely that most long-term editors who have been active for years have had most of their text mercilessly edited into oblivion and have very low average trust levels? And more recent editors may have higher trust levels? With the disclaimer that I haven't read the paper since the 2006 Wikimania, no, the algorithm is smarter than that. Simply having your edits overwritten at some point in the future is not going to detract from the period of time that your edit lasted. Additionally, if some but not all of your words persist through rewrites that would contribute to your reputation. If you merely revert vandalism that removes a persistent piece of text, doesn't that unfairly contribute to your reputation as the text continues to persist and the algorithm thinks that anyone who added it was doing so independently? Carcharoth Why would it matter? If you did the right thing, thats all that there is to care about. This is what im worried about, Wikipedia: The RPG getting even more ingrained. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l -- -Brock ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Googley comments
Bod Notbod wrote: One of the proposals on the strategy wiki has recommended an adjustment to talk pages. I added that perhaps the tab should be called discussion/feedback to encourage people who are primarily readers to let us know what they thought of an article without it necessarily sounding like they had to be knowledgeable. I'm afraid I can't link to the proposal cos I can't remember the name or whether I watchlisted it. But I imagine this kind of proposal is fairly common: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13573 The introduction of Talk pages was, it should not be forgotten, one of the most brilliant innovations of the early days of Wikipedia. The idea that the Talk page is specifically for discussions aimed at improving the article in its current state is actually a pillar of how we work. Feedback of the like it/hate it kind (which is what voting would be) cuts across all that: I think that is obvious based on experience of how people (readers - most of the world doesn't edit) react to articles. A single annoying aspect is likely to get negative votes, and whether voting is commented or not, there are going to be problems. So before some strategy genius decides that whole namespace is for something other than its traditional role, I think there should be a pause for reflection. Perhaps there could be a way of encouraging comments which were general (not specific to an existing thread or starting a new topic), and simply filed in a dedicated general comment archive, running in parallel with the traditional slug-it-out editing-related comments. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
Risker wrote: There are some opportunities to improve practices here, and to really take a look and decide which articles (and rarely, article talk pages) need this indefinite protection. At the same time, I really do believe that if an admin is going to reduce protection on a page with an extensive history of problems, he or she has a responsibility to keep an eye on the page for at least a couple of weeks afterward to ensure there isn't a fresh outbreak of inappropriate behaviour. Agree with both points, naturally. But the discussion as a whole seems to indicate that protection has become one of our more Byzantine concepts. Some work ought to go on, simplifying it from a hypertext stance (categorisation and tagging), so that what happens is more transparent. Anyone interested in reviewing the system and writing an on-site essay? Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the vanishing point is nowhere in sight! Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 11:15 AM, Charles Matthewscharles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: Carcharoth wrote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8237271.stm Interesting story there. Hadn't realised there was even a lawsuit in progress. With Google books, any student anywhere in the US will have the books in the greatest libraries of the world at their fingertips. Which is terrific, if you happen to be in the USA. I have a few questions about Google Books, which in general as a service makes it much easier for me to find references. 1. Do we have an approved and sensible citation style for GB? The point is that some people simply paste in the very long GB URL for a page. I tend to do the other thing, which is to treat it no differently from a book I have open in front of me. 2. How much do we know about visibility of GB pages in various countries round the world? This obviously affects what to do about 1. (There is a clear contradiction to our mission if the given reference as URL appears broken in various parts of the world.) 3. The GB interface is in beta, I think, and the recent upgrade appeared to be largely cosmetic (and unhelpful to people like me who would like to copy-and-paste citation details, since the year of publication was moved). Can we influence their designers? There is the issue: could there be a button so that a full citation (GB URL _plus_ traditional page reference) was made available? Since the metadata is (sadly) often substandard, could there be a routine way of reporting this to Google as feedback? In general, could the WMF get its act together as a potential large-scale customer likely to link to many relatively obscure scholarly texts on GB, and explain our requirements to make good linking as easy as possible? Good points. As well as responses on this list, you might want to raise this on foundation-l and on-wiki somewhere. I'd search in the Wikipedia namespace for Google Books and hope we have some helpful citation instructions already that would be a starting point. You might also want to check that external links thingy that can tell you how many links we have to Google Books. Carcharoth ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] [Wikitech-l] Fwd: Wired: Wikipedia to Color Code Untrustworthy Text
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:33 AM, Samuel Kleinmeta...@gmail.com wrote: The name strikes me as the biggest drawback of the current system. I think de Alfaro put it well himself in his quote from Information Week: 'Despite its name, WikiTrust can't directly measure whether text is trustworthy. It can only measure user agreement, said de Alfaro. That's what it does. ' http://www.informationweek.com/news/internet/security/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=219500669 -Sage ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
On 9/5/09, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the vanishing point is nowhere in sight! FR? (Racks brains). I assume you mean flagged revisions? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
Tony Sidaway wrote: On 9/5/09, Charles Matthews charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com wrote: I was away and missed the FR discussions, but I have to say this: the vanishing point is nowhere in sight! FR? (Racks brains). I assume you mean flagged revisions? Got it in one! Oh, and vanishing point is a term in perspective drawing. Just ignore me if the opacity get unbearable, though. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Putting some perspective on the end of Wikipedia
2009/9/5 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com: Would it be possible for you to do a comparison with Wikipedia just before semiprotection was enabled? I've long wanted to know whether the argument that semiprotections would replace full protections holds any water. Such a comparison should be possible. We have protection logs, we should be able to go through them and work out how many articles were (semi-)protected at any given time. A graph of that data would reveal any obvious impact of the introduction of semi protection (work out a trend from the data before the introduction and see if the data after it fits it or not). Is there a machine readable version of the protection log anywhere? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. Secondly I like the idea of asking Google Books to specify what sort of citation THEY would like a person to use. In lieu of that, there is a standard form of citation to include the repository in which you found the item, as well as the item itself. I think though, 99.34% of our writers probably will continue to use the simplest form possible. In fact we have a robot just to help fill out bad citations. When I find them, I tend to make these citations fuller myself, but it's a never-ending task. Will ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. That is probably illegal, though. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. That is probably illegal, though. Or at least a violation of the Terms of Service. I dislike such advice that takes the form of 'oh, that's not a problem, just do technically involved thing to bypass an issue'. Yes, and we could defeat any DRM just by randomly guessing the encryption key or hand-soldering a chip we fabbed ourselves to fool the protocols; does that mean we shouldn't worry about things like DRM because there's always some way to work around it? Or heck, we could just disable editing entirely - that way anyone wanting to edit will have to exploit a buffer overflow or remote server hole before they can modify the SQL tables; this will guarantee that only those people who really want to edit will edit, and isn't that a good thing? Clearly the Foundation's expenditures on user-friendliness are a waste. Technical possibility is not real possibility. The differences between these humorous examples are ones only of degree, not kind. -- gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
No people *should* break and ignore stupid rules :) Just like the pigs do. What you didn't live during the '60s ? I mean it's not like you're going to be sued by WMG for 2.4 million . W.J. fight the man ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
2009/9/5 Gwern Branwen gwe...@gmail.com: On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. That is probably illegal, though. Or at least a violation of the Terms of Service. Contract violation *is* illegal. (Assuming a website ToS is a binding contract - has that ever been tested in court?) ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
Gwern Branwen wrote: On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:35 PM, Thomas Daltonthomas.dal...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: Charles a few things. You do not need to be in the US to read a Google Book. There is a thing called proxy or super proxy or something of that sort, which will mask where you are, and thus allow anyone to read a book as if they were in the US. That is probably illegal, though. Or at least a violation of the Terms of Service. I dislike such advice that takes the form of 'oh, that's not a problem, just do technically involved thing to bypass an issue'. Yup, there is a reason the wjhon...@aol.com mails still have a killfile chez moi. Managing to miss the point that if a link appears broken to anyone in the world it might simply get removed seems a fundamental error. It wasn't about whether I'm deprived of the info, but what form of citation is good to have on Wikipedia for this patchy service. Charles ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
1. Do we have an approved and sensible citation style for GB? The point is that some people simply paste in the very long GB URL for a page. I tend to do the other thing, which is to treat it no differently from a book I have open in front of me. You do both. As I understand it , the standard way at WP of citing anything from GNews and the like, which I think applies to GBooks also, is to cite the actual published work as an ordinary book, including the page number, and then add the link as a convenience link in the for [http: whatever Google Books]. The cite books template also has a place to do it. The rationale is that it is absolutely essential to give a source that can be used in a library by anyone to obtain the book either there or via interlibrary loan. It's also necessary though to say where you actually found the reference--hence the link to GBooks. All such refs to the Googles and similar convenience links, such as Proquest and Lexis and JSTOR ) need to be checked and if necessary upgraded. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 1:22:45 PM Pacific Daylight Time, charles.r.matth...@ntlworld.com writes: Yup, there is a reason the wjhon...@aol.com mails still have a killfile chez moi. Managing to miss the point that if a link appears broken to anyone in the world it might simply get removed seems a fundamental error. It wasn't about whether I'm deprived of the info, but what form of citation is good to have on Wikipedia for this patchy service. And you seem to be missing the point, my pointy friend, that you should always cite to *your* source, not their source. If you read it on Google books, then you should credit google books. That's standard citation practice. Will the point buster Johnson ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
I forgot to mention that the G Book interface has a list of links on the left , headed: Get this book. First it lists commercial sources, and then it almost always lists: Find this book in a library. That link takes you to the record for the book in WorldCat. You can use the necessary part directly, or: The WorldCat interface has at the top under the search box Cite/Export giving a choice of formats--I usually pick Turabian. The proper reference will appear, except that you need to add the ISBN from the main record also. Probably this can be automated. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 4:26 PM, David Goodmandgoodma...@gmail.com wrote: 1. Do we have an approved and sensible citation style for GB? The point is that some people simply paste in the very long GB URL for a page. I tend to do the other thing, which is to treat it no differently from a book I have open in front of me. You do both. As I understand it , the standard way at WP of citing anything from GNews and the like, which I think applies to GBooks also, is to cite the actual published work as an ordinary book, including the page number, and then add the link as a convenience link in the for [http: whatever Google Books]. The cite books template also has a place to do it. The rationale is that it is absolutely essential to give a source that can be used in a library by anyone to obtain the book either there or via interlibrary loan. It's also necessary though to say where you actually found the reference--hence the link to GBooks. All such refs to the Googles and similar convenience links, such as Proquest and Lexis and JSTOR ) need to be checked and if necessary upgraded. David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG gwern ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:10:48 PM Pacific Daylight Time, wikim...@inbox.org writes: But the link should go to a generic page which potentially works with more sites than just Google Books, like [[Special:BookSources]]. I like that. Make Google Books just one of the options. I can see a potential problem if we're trying to cite a convenience link directly to a page number and the book has multiple editions. We'd need to know the ISBN. If the repository is Google Books, does it actually state the ISBN or give some way to find it easily? It wouldn't be a good thing if we make it much more complex, nobody would do it, and we'd have a maintenance nightmare. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: In a message dated 9/5/2009 1:18:07 PM Pacific Daylight Time, thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes: Contract violation *is* illegal. (Assuming a website ToS is a binding contract - has that ever been tested in court?) Piffle. Who is going to sue? Who has standing to sue? I really see this as a non-starter. Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing restrictions on Google books? ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:37:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes: Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing restrictions on Google books? Google suffers no damage from people in Namibia viewing a book through a proxy. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
2009/9/5 wjhon...@aol.com: In a message dated 9/5/2009 2:37:08 PM Pacific Daylight Time, thomas.dal...@gmail.com writes: Either Google or the publisher/author of the book you viewed. People get sued for bypassing DRM, why couldn't they be sued for bypassing restrictions on Google books? Google suffers no damage from people in Namibia viewing a book through a proxy. Ok, so it would be publisher or author, then. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
[WikiEN-l] Google Books class action lawsuit
When I cite from Google Books I use something like this:
ref name=Wilson{{cite book|last=Wilson|first=Carol|title=Freedom at
risk: the kidnapping of free Blacks in America,
1780–1865|publisher=University Press of
Kentucky|date=1994|pages=43–44|isbn=0813118581|url=
http://books.google.com/books?id=ptFqye_hg54Cpg=PA43|accessdate=2009-08-11}
}/ref
That makes both a direct link to GBooks with the first cited page open, and
an ISBN link for general book sources.
The refTools gadget makes it easy to copy-paste the details from the GBooks
information page. A tool that automatically pulls the fields from Google and
outputs the template would save time.
I live in Sweden and I never had a problem accessing GBooks. Is it only
blocked in some countries, or are some parts restricted?
___
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Yeah, let's botspam Wikipedia. I'm sure that'll work out just fine.
2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: What could possibly go wrong? http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo-tools/115582-wikipedia-linking-tool.html If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know! Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you to get a topup from. Why do you still read SEO sites? They are all that stupid. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Yeah, let's botspam Wikipedia. I'm sure that'll work out just fine.
2009/9/6 Thomas Dalton thomas.dal...@gmail.com: 2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com: If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know! Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you to get a topup from. Why do you still read SEO sites? They are all that stupid. I have a Google alert on Wikipedia. - d. ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Re: [WikiEN-l] Yeah, let's botspam Wikipedia. I'm sure that'll work out just fine.
2009/9/6 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com What could possibly go wrong? http://www.blackhatworld.com/blackhat-seo/black-hat-seo-tools/115582-wikipedia-linking-tool.html If your life is suffering from inadequate levels of stupid (I know! Whose doesn't?), that looks like just the forum for you to get a topup from. Amazing how few people realise that we're also perfectly capable of blacklisting their websites, and will do so without hesitation should a spambot show up. Heck, we give people a hard time for putting in half a dozen of the same links. Risker ___ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
