[WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
28 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond
I've brought this up at the talk page at [[Wikipedia:External links]]
and ended up with more contempt than actual answers, so maybe some
people in the know will be nice enough to actually clear some things up
for us.

1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?

2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.

3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
[[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.

I'm starting to think that our focus on spam is becoming a problem
rather than a benefit to the project.  How much collateral damage are we
willing to accept in the project to take care of this "problem" that
people think is massive?  One out of every 10?  5% poor hits?  Do we
have some sort of measurement we're using here?

-Jeff

--
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: [hidden email]
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
        Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
        - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Pedro Sanchez-2
On 1/21/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:
> 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
> arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
> [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
> could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
> screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.

Yes we know, jeff.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Ken Arromdee
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> Yes we know, jeff.

Well, I didn't know.


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

John Doe-27
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
regarding this HAVE YOU NO CLUE what spam is? there have been massive
attacks by spammers recently there was one user that added 142 links to the
same site, the reason? to increase the sites rank in google. as for blog,
myspace.com the reason is simple there is no need to link to jimbobs blog as
per my reasoning at WT:EL
Betacommand

On 1/21/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> I've brought this up at the talk page at [[Wikipedia:External links]]
> and ended up with more contempt than actual answers, so maybe some
> people in the know will be nice enough to actually clear some things up
> for us.
>
> 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
> links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
> Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?
>
> 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
> request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
> what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
> not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
> perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
> we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
> material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
> Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
> patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
> on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.
>
> 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
> arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
> [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
> could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
> screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.
>
> I'm starting to think that our focus on spam is becoming a problem
> rather than a benefit to the project.  How much collateral damage are we
> willing to accept in the project to take care of this "problem" that
> people think is massive?  One out of every 10?  5% poor hits?  Do we
> have some sort of measurement we're using here?
>
> -Jeff
>
> --
> Name: Jeff Raymond
> E-mail: [hidden email]
> WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
> IM: badlydrawnjeff
> Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
>         Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
>         - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Stephen Bain
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
On 1/22/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
> links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
> Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?

I'm not completely sure what you mean, but I think you're asking why
nofollow is applied to links to pages hosted at Wikia. The answer to
that is that MediaWiki treats external links [1] differently to
interwiki links, and nofollow is only applied to external links.

So if my wikitext had [http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hauptseite] I
would get an external link, with nofollow, but if I had
[[w:de:Hauptseite]] I would get an interwiki link without nofollow.

This is sort of a bug, since there are many many sites which can be
linked to this way: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Interwiki_map

--
Stephen Bain
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

George William Herbert
In reply to this post by John Doe-27
On 1/21/07, John Doe <[hidden email]> wrote:

> regarding this HAVE YOU NO CLUE what spam is? there have been massive
> attacks by spammers recently there was one user that added 142 links to the
> same site, the reason? to increase the sites rank in google. as for blog,
> myspace.com the reason is simple there is no need to link to jimbobs blog as
> per my reasoning at WT:EL
> Betacommand
>
> On 1/21/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I've brought this up at the talk page at [[Wikipedia:External links]]
> > and ended up with more contempt than actual answers, so maybe some
> > people in the know will be nice enough to actually clear some things up
> > for us.
> >
> > 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
> > links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
> > Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?
> >
> > 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
> > request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
> > what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
> > not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
> > perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
> > we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
> > material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
> > Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
> > patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
> > on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.
> >
> > 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
> > arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
> > [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
> > could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
> > screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.
> >
> > I'm starting to think that our focus on spam is becoming a problem
> > rather than a benefit to the project.  How much collateral damage are we
> > willing to accept in the project to take care of this "problem" that
> > people think is massive?  One out of every 10?  5% poor hits?  Do we
> > have some sort of measurement we're using here?


Let's assume for the moment that everyone reading knows what spam is
and what the level of spam problem is for WP.

What we don't all know, is enough about what's being done about it,
and how it's implemented.

As that can bite anyone, and in particular more experienced editors
and admins working on problem issues, it might be better if there was
more communications regarding anti-spam measures taken...


--
-george william herbert
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Ray Saintonge
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
Jeff Raymond wrote:

>I've brought this up at the talk page at [[Wikipedia:External links]]
>and ended up with more contempt than actual answers, so maybe some
>people in the know will be nice enough to actually clear some things up
>for us.
>
It looks like yet another POV zoo.  Sometimes the swath of destruction
from these rule-mongers is beyond belief.  I can no longer be bothered
with these rules debates, because unlike the rule-mongers I find there
are more interesting things to do.  Left to their own devices they can
invent whatever silly rule they want by sheer brute force.  No stretch
of the imagination will conclude that any type of consensus has been
reached.  Most of these rules are unlikely to affect what I do, but that
does not prevent me from being troubled by the fundamental disrespect of
fairness that these rule-mongers practise.

>I'm starting to think that our focus on spam is becoming a problem
>rather than a benefit to the project.  How much collateral damage are we
>willing to accept in the project to take care of this "problem" that
>people think is massive?  One out of every 10?  5% poor hits?  Do we
>have some sort of measurement we're using here?
>
No problem like spam can ever be eradicated completely.  When some
people become obsessed with removing any link that might seem to be
promoting a product, no matter how relevant to the article things have
probably gone too far.  I am very much aware of the dangers of excess
advertising, and how easy it would be to be overrun by it, but once it
has gone below a certain threshhold maybe there are other priorities.

Ec


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

MacGyverMagic/Mgm
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
On 1/22/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
> request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
> what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
> not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
> perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
> we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
> material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
> Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
> patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
> on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.


Other blogs aren't a-okay, but it's simply not possible to block all blogs.
Personally, I will allow blogs as sources when its contents can clearly be
attributed to a notable individual. 99% of MySpace members isn't remotely
notable at all.

Mgm
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Mark
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

> On 1/22/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
>> request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
>> what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
>> not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
>> perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
>> we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
>> material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
>> Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
>> patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
>> on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.
>>    
>
>
> Other blogs aren't a-okay, but it's simply not possible to block all blogs.
> Personally, I will allow blogs as sources when its contents can clearly be
> attributed to a notable individual. 99% of MySpace members isn't remotely
> notable at all.
>  

The point is that many MySpace blogs *are* hosted by notable
individuals, which is what makes the blanked technical-level blocking
(as opposed to editor-level exercise of judgment) problematic.  And also
note that we're not talking about *sources*, but *external links*.  
While I agree that rarely is a blog a good source for anything, it seems
absurd to me that the blog of Professor X is not a suitable external
link from the page [[Professor X]].

-Mark


_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Thomas Dalton
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
> 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
> links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
> Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?

Looks like Wikia is treated as an interwiki link, which assumes it's
part of the same project. I'd report it as a bug, if I were you.

> 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
> request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
> what rationale.  I won't pretend to know what Jimbo's been up to past
> not having edited Wikipedia since the is-it-or-is-it-not-a decree, but
> perhaps some more explanation on this would be worthwhile?  Seems like
> we're blocking a shitload of otherwise worthwhile primary source
> material for many of our articles for the sake of...well...nothing.
> Meanwhile, a blog ''not'' hosted on MySpace is still a-okay, which is
> patently absurd on its face.  I'm wondering what the thought process was
> on this, since no one else seems to want to chime in.

MySpace blogs are never a reliable source for anything other than a
MySpace blog, and they are virtually never notable, so I don't see a
problem.

> 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
> arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
> [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
> could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
> screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.

I knew, but I've never looked at the blacklist. I've just trusted
it... was I wrong to?

> I'm starting to think that our focus on spam is becoming a problem
> rather than a benefit to the project.  How much collateral damage are we
> willing to accept in the project to take care of this "problem" that
> people think is massive?  One out of every 10?  5% poor hits?  Do we
> have some sort of measurement we're using here?

I don't think there is much if any collateral damage from our
anti-spam efforts. I can remember one problem with ShadowBot removing
a link that it shouldn't have, and I think it was resolved by fixing
the blacklist (I don't remember exactly, I wasn't actually involved to
a great extent).

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
On 22/01/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2) Myspace blogs were recently added to the spam blacklist by Raul per
> request of Jimbo, although no one else seems to know why, how, or per
> what rationale.


Because the pages themselves are often appropriate external links, but
the blogs almost never are - and there were enough of them that they
were becoming a problem in themselves.

Note that a link can still be put into the text if you leave the
http:// off the front, so that it's only text. This way a blog post
could be used as e.g. a reference should that be appropriate in a
given caes.


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond
In reply to this post by John Doe-27
John Doe wrote:
> regarding this HAVE YOU NO CLUE what spam is? there have been massive
> attacks by spammers recently there was one user that added 142 links to the
> same site, the reason? to increase the sites rank in google. as for blog,
> myspace.com the reason is simple there is no need to link to jimbobs blog as
> per my reasoning at WT:EL

I certainly have a clue.  And I bet we simply reverted him, right?
That's how we should be dealing with it.

Also, I have yet to see a useful defense of blacklisting MySpace blogs,
so if you have one, I'd love to see it.

-Jeff


--
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: [hidden email]
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
        Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
        - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond
In reply to this post by MacGyverMagic/Mgm
MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

>
> Other blogs aren't a-okay, but it's simply not possible to block all blogs.
> Personally, I will allow blogs as sources when its contents can clearly be
> attributed to a notable individual. 99% of MySpace members isn't remotely
> notable at all.

So because most blogs aren't useful, we'll simply assume they all
aren't.  Hey, most websites aren't useful, either, why not disable all
external linking altogether?

-Jeff

--
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: [hidden email]
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
        Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
        - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond
In reply to this post by Thomas Dalton
It's very annoying to have to remember to hit "reply to all."  Can list
admins fix this, please?



Thomas Dalton wrote:
>> 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
>> links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
>> Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?
>
> Looks like Wikia is treated as an interwiki link, which assumes it's
> part of the same project. I'd report it as a bug, if I were you.
>

I'm hoping that the nofollow is temporary/abandoned in that time.

> MySpace blogs are never a reliable source for anything other than a
> MySpace blog, and they are virtually never notable, so I don't see a
> problem.

This will be the last time I repeat it here to save people's inboxes -
"virtually never" doesn't mean we ignore the "sometimes," especially on
the technical side.
>
>> 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
>> arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
>> [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
>> could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
>> screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.
>
> I knew, but I've never looked at the blacklist. I've just trusted
> it... was I wrong to?

Trust but verify, at the least.

> I don't think there is much if any collateral damage from our
> anti-spam efforts. I can remember one problem with ShadowBot removing
> a link that it shouldn't have, and I think it was resolved by fixing
> the blacklist (I don't remember exactly, I wasn't actually involved to
> a great extent).

Between the heavy-handed use of G11, having a blacklist BOT,
blacklisting an arbitrary blog site on the blacklist, I think there's a
lot more collateral damage than we're owning up to.

-Jeff


--
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: [hidden email]
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
        Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
        - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
On 22/01/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:
> MacGyverMagic/Mgm wrote:

> > Other blogs aren't a-okay, but it's simply not possible to block all blogs.
> > Personally, I will allow blogs as sources when its contents can clearly be
> > attributed to a notable individual. 99% of MySpace members isn't remotely
> > notable at all.

> So because most blogs aren't useful, we'll simply assume they all
> aren't.  Hey, most websites aren't useful, either, why not disable all
> external linking altogether?


Because there were enough MySpace blogs in particular being used as
spam links to be a discernible individual problem, with no known cases
where they were the right link and just the MySpace page itself
wasn't.

What actual (non-hypothetical examples) do you have where the blog is
an apposite link rather than the MySpace page itself?


- d.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond
David Gerard wrote:

> Because there were enough MySpace blogs in particular being used as
> spam links to be a discernible individual problem, with no known cases
> where they were the right link and just the MySpace page itself
> wasn't.

There are enough external links being used as spam links to warrant the
same thing.  I'm still not buying it.
>
> What actual (non-hypothetical examples) do you have where the blog is
> an apposite link rather than the MySpace page itself?

I can't give anything but hypotheticals, but the idea that MySpace blogs
can't be useful as primary sources for their subjects is crazy.

-Jeff

>
>
> - d.
>
>
>


--
Name: Jeff Raymond
E-mail: [hidden email]
WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
IM: badlydrawnjeff
Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
        Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
        - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

geni
In reply to this post by Mark
On 1/22/07, Delirium <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The point is that many MySpace blogs *are* hosted by notable
> individuals, which is what makes the blanked technical-level blocking
> (as opposed to editor-level exercise of judgment) problematic.

Don't forget the whitelist. The blocking isn't blanket.
--
geni

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Pedro Sanchez-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
> So because most blogs aren't useful, we'll simply assume they all
> aren't.  Hey, most websites aren't useful, either, why not disable all
> external linking altogether?
>
> -Jeff

What a GREAT idea, jeff :)

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Pedro Sanchez-2
In reply to this post by Jeff Raymond
On 1/22/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It's very annoying to have to remember to hit "reply to all."  Can list
> admins fix this, please?
>
>
>
> Thomas Dalton wrote:
> >> 1) If we're going to blindly attach "nofollow" to all the external
> >> links, why are we allowing Wikia links to be propped up artificially?
> >> Are we in the business of conflict of interest now?
> >
> > Looks like Wikia is treated as an interwiki link, which assumes it's
> > part of the same project. I'd report it as a bug, if I were you.
> >
>
> I'm hoping that the nofollow is temporary/abandoned in that time.
>
> > MySpace blogs are never a reliable source for anything other than a
> > MySpace blog, and they are virtually never notable, so I don't see a
> > problem.
>
> This will be the last time I repeat it here to save people's inboxes -
> "virtually never" doesn't mean we ignore the "sometimes," especially on
> the technical side.
> >
> >> 3) Did you folks know we have a bot that reverts links that are
> >> arbitrarily considered spam?  I didn't until today.
> >> [[User:Shadowbot1]].  I convinced him to post the blacklist where we
> >> could see it, and while some (most?) are useful, others are pretty
> >> screwy, and I'm not sure this is helpful in the long run.
> >
> > I knew, but I've never looked at the blacklist. I've just trusted
> > it... was I wrong to?
>
> Trust but verify, at the least.
>
> > I don't think there is much if any collateral damage from our
> > anti-spam efforts. I can remember one problem with ShadowBot removing
> > a link that it shouldn't have, and I think it was resolved by fixing
> > the blacklist (I don't remember exactly, I wasn't actually involved to
> > a great extent).
>
> Between the heavy-handed use of G11, having a blacklist BOT,
> blacklisting an arbitrary blog site on the blacklist, I think there's a
> lot more collateral damage than we're owning up to.
>
> -Jeff
>
>
> --
> Name: Jeff Raymond
> E-mail: [hidden email]
> WWW: http://www.internationalhouseofbacon.com
> IM: badlydrawnjeff
> Quote: "As the hobbits are going up Mount Doom, the
>         Eye of Mordor is being drawn somewhere else."
>         - Sen. Rick Santorum on the war in Iraq.
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

Jeff, I'm surprised that a process follower like you complain about
the bot, that was approved  via the usual channels , got consensus,
and thus approved.

Process was followed, don't you tell me that process isn't always good
and thus should be ignored. How is that possible jeff??

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [WikiEN-l] a few new wrinkles in the external link issue

Jeff Raymond

Pedro Sanchez wrote:
> On 1/22/07, Jeff Raymond <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>> It's very annoying to have to remember to hit "reply to all."  Can list
>> admins fix this, please?

> Jeff, I'm surprised that a process follower like you complain about
> the bot, that was approved  via the usual channels , got consensus,
> and thus approved.
>
> Process was followed, don't you tell me that process isn't always good
> and thus should be ignored. How is that possible jeff??

I don't recall complaining about the bot process.  In any regard, I don't
think complaints after the fact, after seeing said bot in action, are bad
things, and perhaps, if discussion with the bot operator isn't fruitful,
the next step in the process can be pursued.

There's plenty of processes we have that I absolutely abhor.  It doesn't
mean I'm not going to follow them until the rest of you come to your
senses. d:-D

-Jeff

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
[hidden email]
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
12