All Posts Tagged Tag: ‘wikipedia’
A couple weeks ago, I attended a session at SXSW Interactive, in which USC Professor of Journalism Andrew Lih talked at length about the declining rate of Wikpedia entry editing. A large part of the problem, as Lih presented it, is that the editorial process itself has become much more complex and confusing over time.
As if to make up for its brief outage earlier this week, Wikipedia has come back with some big news: the site will soon change in several important ways. It’ll change soon, too, with an overhaul of the English-language version of Wikipedia scheduled to start late next month.
Courtesy of Google, the nonprofit Wikimedia Foundation has received a significant gift. Google donated $2 million to the organization, which is responsible for keeping Wikipedia up and running.
Wikipedia had a record-shattering day this week. On Tuesday afternoon, the Wikimedia Foundation posted a personal appeal from its founder, Jimmy Wales. In that, Wales said:
The Wikimedia Foundation is the non-profit organization I created in 2003 to operate, grow, nurture, and protect Wikipedia. For ten million US dollars a year and with a staff of fewer than 35 people, it runs the fifth most-read website in the entire world. I’m asking for your help so we can continue our work.
Wikipedia is a very useful site for anyone looking to find information on any given topic. Chances are that you have used it for research at one time or another. Even if you don’t start by going directly to Wikipedia, results from the site are often at the top of search results in Google, and you’ll get there anyway.
We recently reported on the notion that Wikipedia losing editors could lead to a decline in accuracy. Sue Gardner, Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation, which runs Wikipedia, tells WebProNews growth in editing has slowed, but the number of editors is just flat, and not declining.
Last week, it was revealed that Wikipedia would be making some changes to its rules for editing. It was reported that the site was testing pages that would require people editing entries to have their changes approved by "experienced" editors before the changes would be made.
Now it appears that some other specific editorial changes are in store for the widely used encyclopedia site. The people behind Wikipedia reportedly intend to implement a color coded system of trust, called WikiTrust.
Microsoft says that reference search sessions average over 9 minutes in length and over 6 queries per session before the user finds what they are looking for. With that in mind, the company is highlighting how Bing handles reference material.
There is clearly great emphasis placed on Wikipedia results, and I have to admit that as I began to read Microsoft’s explanation, I was starting to think, "Why not just cut out the middle man and search Wikipedia?"
The company says things like:
It appears that all Wikimedia content will become available for free under the Creative Commons License soon. This has been approved by a 75% majority of community voters, though the decision has not yet been approved by the Wikimedia Foundation’s board of trustees. The licensing update/result page says:
Dmoz.org, also known as the Open Directory Project, is widely considered to be the mother of all directories. Well, that was the case at one time, anyway. Dmoz has dropped significantly in popularity over the years, and is the subject of much criticism by webmasters looking for inclusion. What do you think about Dmoz these days? Is it still valuable? Tell us what you think.
Parts of the UK government may start to take after some ultra-popular websites and online services if David Cameron has his way. Cameron, the leader of Britain’s Conservative Party, directed nods toward Wikipedia, Google, and Microsoft in a recent speech.
A new way of searching is on the way, and will come under the label Wolfram Alpha. This is a "knowledge engine" built by Stephen Wolfram, which allows users to ask questions and receive a single definitive answer rather than a page of results pointing to pages that may or may not have the answers they are looking for.
What is your most frequently visited destination when it comes to music searches? There’s a good chance it’s Wikipedia. Heather Dougherty of Hitwise put together some interesting data involving the top music destinations online. Based on her research, the largest percentage of traffic (at 24%) went there.
It’s about to get harder to edit a Wikipedia entry. That is unless those who oppose the concept can come up with a better idea.
Who among us hasn’t encountered some false information on the site at one time or another. The goal here is to make Wikipedia, which is one of the most popular sites on the web, a more reliable place for obtaining accurate information. That can’t be a bad thing from the average user’s perspective.
If this recession thing gets really bad, maybe the government can just call in Jimmy Wales. Wales, Wikipedia’s founder, seems to have been instrumental in helping the online encyclopedia hit a fundraising goal, and Wikipedia should be set for at least six months as a result.
Back in March, the official article count for all versions of Wikipedia combined hit 10 million. It was an impressive moment, but one that might have come much sooner if not for some overly complicated procedures. So Wikipedia has been given a large grant to make contributing to the volunteer-written encyclopedia easier.
German Left Party politician Lutz Heilmann didn’t like some of the claims printed in a Wikipedia article about him. As a result, Heilmann filed an injunction against the German version of the site, caused a massive outcry, and has now backed down in the face of all the attention.
Google’s Knol isn’t doing so well. Despite being portrayed by some outsiders as a would-be Wikipedia-killer, the knowledge-sharing site has been more or less ignored since its launch. Google’s solution: launch it again, this time in German, Italian, and French.
Google went live with Knol, a platform to read and write articles on all kinds of subjects. Knol was being tested privately since some time and had been pre-announced back in 2007. The address is knol.google.com, but notably not knol.com or knol.org or even googleknol.com. This project is somewhat reminiscent of Wikipedia, though there are many differences as well.
Until a couple of days ago, if you would type in a query that would be available on Wikipedia, then the SERPs (Search Engine Result Pages) just came out with the exact match and the link to the article.
New stats show that Wikipedia isn’t growing nearly as fast as it used to. The number of unique U.S. visitors to the site increased by an amazing 7,900 (or so) percent over the last five years, however, and Wikipedia seems to owe search engines for its continuing popularity.
Yahoo this, Microsoft that – it’s enough to make you move to China. Or at least look at China-centric news, in which Baidu is generating headlines for both succeeding financially and pushing its own version of Wikipedia.
So another college professor has banned Wikipedia (and Google). Oh, woe is me. The world is ending. Oh, the stifling of creative thought at institutions of higher learning these days. Censorship! Censorship!
The web levels the playing field, allowing individuals to compete with larger corporations, largely through the smaller players making dirt public and launching viral marketing campaigns around issues. Because there is a publisher publishing every opinion and angle, it is easy to discount just about everything, especially attempts for new market participants to become remarkable.
Know what a Christmas market is? If you’re American, you might well not – Wikipedia lists only six of them for our country, while there are closer to 30 entries for Europe. Still, that’s all the more reason to show interest in a new Hitwise report on the subject.
It’s been awhile since we had any Wikipedia controversy, so maybe it’s about time for a pile-on — you know, something about how Jimmy Wales doesn’t care about quality, or how he runs the “open source” encyclopedia as his own personal fiefdom, or how people run around using strange technical terms that no one outside the Wikipedia cabal can understand (okay, that last one is totally true).
This time it’s the revelation of a top-secret… wait for it… mailing list only for insiders! According to a breathless piece in The Register:
It is (I think) becoming public knowledge that Google has crushed all of its opponents in France – the company has a search market share of around ninety percent. A new study is surprising, then, in that it reveals large similarities between the French versions of Google and Yahoo.
It looks like the Windows Live Search Club, the puzzle game promotion that seemed so successful for Microsoft at first, is quickly turning into a PR disaster for the company.
The Club, which had searchers play puzzle games in order to win prizes, originally gave Microsoft a huge boost in search engine market share, a gain which has slowly dissapeared entirely in the last few months. Even worse, though, is the anger the Club’s fans are now turning towards the company.
You don’t need to worry about pixies hawking Diet Pepsi or having to watch action heroes put on Axe deodorant. Google intends to address ads in video games in a different way, and according to new reports, it intends to do so starting this month.
By all accounts, Radiohead’s name-your-own-price album was downloaded millions of times. No one’s sure how much people paid, however. And although the Wikimedia Foundation has apparently received over 14,000 donations, the dollar value of those gifts remains unknown.
Moderator: Danny Sullivan, Editor-in-Chief, Search Engine Land