Wikipedia... PR 9

bebsie · 10-31-2006, 12:19 PM

Whenever I search a definition on the net using google, wikipedia willalways be there on the first page of the search result. It has highpage rank currently 9/10. so i usually use it. just this morning i'veread this article that lists various wishes to google by Sharon Housleyhere's an excerpt from her articlebrbrspan style="font-style: italic;"Weigh Wikipedia Less./spanbr style="font-style: italic;"br style="font-style: italic;"span style="font-style: italic;"Letsface it, ANYONE can edit Wikipedia.The information read in Wikipediamight be accurate one day andincorrect the next. Wikipedia is a niceresource, but is not a reliableindicator of information. Please do notuse links from Wikipedia toindicate a sites worth. Wikipedia uses thesame model as Dmoz which haslanguished, volunteers can only do so much.brbr/spanWhat do you think of this.a href="http://www.jpservicez-searcharticles.com/article.detail.php/55964/511/Google-General/Internet/13/My-Google-Wish-List"Full copy/a. span style="font-style: italic;"brbrspan style="font-style: italic;"/spanbr/span

andrew247 · 10-31-2006, 02:44 PM

Wikipedia is a PR9 because it has so many links going towards it, and it is so popular. It also has an abundance of quality content.

It can be inaccurate, but overall, I tend to trust most of the mainstream articles there. Some (e.g. a School's article), might be slightly inaccurate, depending on whether the person writing the article liked the school or not.

Fridge-Door · 10-31-2006, 07:12 PM

Google relly doesn't have any way to tell if a sites content is accurate, only that it is popular. As for other site that maybe ranked higher if wikipedia was droped in rank would be any more accurate.

anylund · 11-02-2006, 01:29 AM

Whenever searching information from the web, use multiple sources. Wikipedia is a good source but every bit of information needs to be backed up. Its silly to see people making a big number of something that one person said. One person asying something is a gossip, hundred people saying something is maybe something noticeable, depending on thier reputation and the fact that are they just repeating the first 'fact'.brbrI dislike these kind of articles (like Sharons) because the power of decision should be possessed by individual people. I am against all movements and people that/who tell people what to think and what to do. If I find Wikipedia usefull I promote it, if Sharon dont like it she can always click to another result page. SIGH.br

10-31-2006, 12:19 PM	#1 (permalink)
bebsie Junior Googler Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 46 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Wikipedia... PR 9 Whenever I search a definition on the net using google, wikipedia willalways be there on the first page of the search result. It has highpage rank currently 9/10. so i usually use it. just this morning i'veread this article that lists various wishes to google by Sharon Housleyhere's an excerpt from her articlebrbrspan style="font-style: italic;"Weigh Wikipedia Less./spanbr style="font-style: italic;"br style="font-style: italic;"span style="font-style: italic;"Letsface it, ANYONE can edit Wikipedia.The information read in Wikipediamight be accurate one day andincorrect the next. Wikipedia is a niceresource, but is not a reliableindicator of information. Please do notuse links from Wikipedia toindicate a sites worth. Wikipedia uses thesame model as Dmoz which haslanguished, volunteers can only do so much.brbr/spanWhat do you think of this.a href="http://www.jpservicez-searcharticles.com/article.detail.php/55964/511/Google-General/Internet/13/My-Google-Wish-List"Full copy/a. span style="font-style: italic;"brbrspan style="font-style: italic;"/spanbr/span

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Post your Wikipedia identity	Randy	Chit Chat	7	03-07-2006 11:09 AM
Wikipedia Watch	Andylkl	General Discussion	3	12-12-2005 05:44 PM
Wikipedia articles?	Eric	Chit Chat	5	06-20-2005 10:22 AM
Wikipedia Watch	Andylkl	General Discussion	3	01-01-1970 12:19 PM

10-31-2006, 02:44 PM	#2 (permalink)
andrew247 Google Guru Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: c:\GoogleCommunity Posts: 3,420 Thanks: 3 Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts	Wikipedia is a PR9 because it has so many links going towards it, and it is so popular. It also has an abundance of quality content. It can be inaccurate, but overall, I tend to trust most of the mainstream articles there. Some (e.g. a School's article), might be slightly inaccurate, depending on whether the person writing the article liked the school or not.

10-31-2006, 07:12 PM	#3 (permalink)
Fridge-Door Noogle Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Australia/QLD/Ipswich Posts: 17 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Google relly doesn't have any way to tell if a sites content is accurate, only that it is popular. As for other site that maybe ranked higher if wikipedia was droped in rank would be any more accurate.

11-02-2006, 01:29 AM	#4 (permalink)
anylund Googler Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 61 Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Whenever searching information from the web, use multiple sources. Wikipedia is a good source but every bit of information needs to be backed up. Its silly to see people making a big number of something that one person said. One person asying something is a gossip, hundred people saying something is maybe something noticeable, depending on thier reputation and the fact that are they just repeating the first 'fact'.brbrI dislike these kind of articles (like Sharons) because the power of decision should be possessed by individual people. I am against all movements and people that/who tell people what to think and what to do. If I find Wikipedia usefull I promote it, if Sharon dont like it she can always click to another result page. SIGH.br

GoogleCommunity Sponsor


Sponsored Links