Comments on: Favor (Google bomb!) http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250 Weblog about the Citizendium project and its Citizens. Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:57:56 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: tom http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-53151 tom Thu, 22 Nov 2007 06:28:17 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-53151 a commercial license would bring us to number 1 people. a commercial license would bring us to number 1 people.

]]> By: Stephen Ewen http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-52874 Stephen Ewen Wed, 21 Nov 2007 09:11:15 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-52874 Folks, this appears to be an experiment, for goodness sake! Butler *does not even register* on Google when searching with "butler", while Telephone newspaper appears in the #5 slot - this, although the CZ articles are far-far-and-away better. Folks, this appears to be an experiment, for goodness sake! Butler *does not even register* on Google when searching with “butler”, while Telephone newspaper appears in the #5 slot - this, although the CZ articles are far-far-and-away better.

]]> By: Paul Wormer http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-52563 Paul Wormer Tue, 20 Nov 2007 09:29:48 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-52563 Wouldn't it make more sense to link to as many CZ articles as are somehow related to your blog or website? Maybe it is not as effective in raising Google page ranks, but it does look not as silly as linking to a completely arbitrary article as http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler. (Unless, of course, you write about domestic service in grand houses). Wouldn’t it make more sense to link to as many CZ articles as are somehow related to your blog or website? Maybe it is not as effective in raising Google page ranks, but it does look not as silly as linking to a completely arbitrary article as http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Butler. (Unless, of course, you write about domestic service in grand houses).

]]> By: Joe Quick http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-52524 Joe Quick Tue, 20 Nov 2007 06:47:40 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-52524 So, am I right that links from Wikipedia don't boost Google ratings? I think I heard that around here somewhere. What about mirrors of Wikipedia? Someone has been going around adding links to CZ articles in the "external links" sections of Wikipedia articles. Those links are mirrored elsewhere, but do we get anything from them? See the number of links we could get from one link at WP: http://www.google.com/search?q=citizendium+tecun+uman So, am I right that links from Wikipedia don’t boost Google ratings? I think I heard that around here somewhere. What about mirrors of Wikipedia?

Someone has been going around adding links to CZ articles in the “external links” sections of Wikipedia articles. Those links are mirrored elsewhere, but do we get anything from them?

See the number of links we could get from one link at WP: http://www.google.com/search?q=citizendium+tecun+uman

]]> By: Larry Sanger http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-52291 Larry Sanger Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:48:38 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-52291 Balderdash, "illuminance." You're telling me about something I know a lot more about than -- well, than anyone else, period. When promoting Wikipedia in its first year -- something I did quite a bit of -- I strongly encouraged people to link to Wikipedia articles, and posted links to pages that linked to ours. No, I don't remember any specific Google bombs, but link exchanges in order to boost our page rank would be just as "questionable" as a Google bomb. But as long as Google has the broken system in place that it does, there is nothing wrong with that. Describing my link request as a "low-down tactic" makes sense only if you think I'm doing this as a "tactic" in order to compete with Wikipedia. But I'm not; that's silly. We can't compete traffic-wise with Wikipedia now, and it will be some time before we are able to. I'm simply trying to bring our PageRank, and traffic, closer in line with our objective value to readers. Having people link far and wide to some of the best available articles online, especially in view of <a href="http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/17/cz-and-whats-wrong-with-google/" rel="nofollow">a broken system</a> of highlighting the best available on the Web for various searches, is a perfectly ethical and professional thing to do, of course. Balderdash, “illuminance.” You’re telling me about something I know a lot more about than — well, than anyone else, period. When promoting Wikipedia in its first year — something I did quite a bit of — I strongly encouraged people to link to Wikipedia articles, and posted links to pages that linked to ours. No, I don’t remember any specific Google bombs, but link exchanges in order to boost our page rank would be just as “questionable” as a Google bomb. But as long as Google has the broken system in place that it does, there is nothing wrong with that.

Describing my link request as a “low-down tactic” makes sense only if you think I’m doing this as a “tactic” in order to compete with Wikipedia. But I’m not; that’s silly. We can’t compete traffic-wise with Wikipedia now, and it will be some time before we are able to. I’m simply trying to bring our PageRank, and traffic, closer in line with our objective value to readers.

Having people link far and wide to some of the best available articles online, especially in view of a broken system of highlighting the best available on the Web for various searches, is a perfectly ethical and professional thing to do, of course.

]]> By: illuminance http://blog.citizendium.org/?p=250#comment-52275 illuminance Mon, 19 Nov 2007 18:19:41 +0000 http://blog.citizendium.org/2007/11/19/favor-google-bomb/#comment-52275 This is a really, really low-down tactic. Wikipedia did not need Google-bombing to become successful, and Citizendium should not stoop so low to attempt use of this tactic either. It really detracts from the perceived professionalism of Citizendium. This is a really, really low-down tactic. Wikipedia did not need Google-bombing to become successful, and Citizendium should not stoop so low to attempt use of this tactic either. It really detracts from the perceived professionalism of Citizendium.

]]>