Comments on: Editing Wikipedia and Ancient Traditions

By: Noob

Noob — Mon, 13 Feb 2006 08:22:14 +0000

What about spinning off a subentry, letting it sit for a while, and then adding a link to the spin off? I figured that would be less obvious, and it was also WP-friendly due to the nature of the entry/subentry. However, the subentry doesn’t appear to have any pagerank and I’ve received almost no traffic from it. My other WP links generate a fair amount of traffic, but those topics are much more popular than either the entry/subentry in question.

Also, I placed a link and it was deleted, followed by it being put back after I defended it. Now, I want to replace that link with another one since I spun that info off to another site. Advised?

By: Irishwonder’s Black Hat SEO Blog » Wikipedia spamming

Irishwonder’s Black Hat SEO Blog » Wikipedia spamming — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 20:12:25 +0000

[...] Graywolf has an excellent post on err… editing Wikipedia to your own benefit. I can confirm from my personal experience all said there has great value and maybe this justÂ happens to be one more step in the direction of making spam intelligent. (Those reading my blog jmore or less regularly know how I hate dumb buttom clicking spammers – if you’re doing it make sure you’re using your head not your backside) [...]

By: Administrator

Administrator — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 14:44:01 +0000

Wired seems to be having a problem now. I did a search for the article title and it’s there, click thru and it’s gone, go figure.

By: Brian Turner

Brian Turner — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 13:45:27 +0000

I’m a big fan of the Amarna period, too.

However, literature has always had a close relationship with propaganda – the study of written history (certainly from the ancient to mediaeval period) is essentially about trying to form objective opinions from political manifestos.

BTW, the Wired article returns a 404.