Please note that it isn't a "vote" for deletion. The Wikipedia article deletion system, curiously called "Articles for Deletion" is used to gauge the consensus of Wikipedia editors on whether a specific article deserves entry. While users who are new to Wikipedia are not ignored (we welcome your comments!), traditionally their comments are given less weight than those of experienced users. User accounts that are made specifically for "voting" in Articles for Deletion are usually ignored completely.
For more, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/V7ndotcom_Elursrebmem |
Thanks, fixed! Three will only show the nickname, no timestamp :) |
The same discussion went on after the german hommingberger gepardenforelle contest started. I despise any type of censorship and am convinced that any suppression of information is wrong although I would not like Nazi propaganda to be displayed on Wikipedia. The Wikipedia censorship practice makes me more and more angry anyhow. I get vexed when my edits with existing articles get removed with threadbare two word justifications. I hate it when essential articles are to be deleted just because a product is involved (advertising?), I think making Wikipedia links nofollow was a great mistake depriving humanity of substantial knowledge.
So that said, this special case is really even more annoying because of course many people will want to check what that strange phrase means and without Wikipedia they will have to rely on participants of the contest they will find in Google.
That sucks. Wikipedia should reverse its drive away from democracy.
Personally I don't like this contest, the phrase is utter nonsense and unpronounceable in contrast to former SEO contests (http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2005-09-24-n48.html) and looks to me like a linking scheme for the organizers. Despite that deleting this entry would be a sad precedent for Wikipedia, the internet community and global democracy as whole. |
> I think making Wikipedia links nofollow was a
> great mistake depriving humanity of substantial
> knowledge
I don't see Wikipedia links as "nofollow"? Or am I misunderstanding...?
> Despite that deleting this entry would be a
> sad precedent for Wikipedia, the internet community
> and global democracy as whole.
I don't think they're deleting this in terms of censorship (e.g. depriving the world of an important but seemingly dangerous/ unwanted idea), but more like an editorial statement of what things an encyclopedia should consist of. But maybe you're right, maybe not everyone can understand what might be of interest to a future encyclopedia reader. Maybe they want to keep Wikipedia (relatively) small to keep it manageable? |
All non english Wikipedias use nofollow as far as I know. That: http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fentermina is most probably the reason, nevertheless it affects all keywords. Moreover this means that non english sites are disriminated against while the english Wikipedia pushes english sources with it's incredible link power. Sounds like some kind of language imperialism to me.
The debate whether deleting is not censorship reminds me a little of the ethnic cleansing vs genocide term difference.
Saying "deleting on one site is ok because there are many other sites it can be published on" could not be applied used to the printed press or could it be? Any entity that deletes information, especially after it was already published, commits censorship. |
The printed press does just the same – an editor reviews the news writers pitch to him, and he will not accept every draft. Similar, a new Wikipedia article is like a draft pitched to the Wikipedia editors (which is everyone, since Wikipedia is more or less a democracy). If you write to your paper encyclopedia of choice demanding that you, Tadeusz, deserve an entry... and they reject you... would that be censorship? |
By the way, I could see the nofollows in German Wikipedia... it's ridiculous that non-English Wikipedia's are using nofollow while the English main one isn't. Where's the rationale in that? |
PS: I started a new thread on this issue of Wikipedia and nofollows (and moved Veky's comment over there).
http://blogoscoped.com/forum/17150.html |
