No-indexing of project-space pages

[Anthony-73]

On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Jonathan Hughes <lifebaka@...> wrote:

> One thing no-indexing user and user talk namespaces would help with is to
> curb the recent trend of userpage spam.  I see half a dozen or more
> userpages a day which are spam or masquerading as articles.  If userspace
> wasn't indexed, pretty soon the companies/persons who attempt this sort of
> advertising will figure out it doesn't work; no one ever finds their
> "article" from Google or Yahoo.
>
> The most recent example that springs into my mind is [[User:Kliff Hanger
> Dot
> Com]] (whose page I didn't think spamish enough to delete, though I still
> blanked it), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kliff_Hanger_Dot_Com .
> There's no question that page should not be sitting around in userspace
> where people can Google it.

Do you really think noindexing of user pages would make any difference
there?  The page is obviously self-promotional, but I would think the
purpose is more to promote oneself to Wikipedians, not to random Google
searchers.

I don't even agree with you that "there's no question" that user page
shoudn't be in Google.  Wikipedians seem to have chosen to not allow certain
types of self-promotion on user pages, but that's by no means a policy which
is beyond question.  Most websites *allow* blatant self-promotion on
people's user page equivalents - for example, Google Knol certainly wouldn't
delete a page like this, and they wouldn't noindex it either.  Unless
there's some other info I'm missing, I'd assume good faith here and give the
person who created that page the benefit of the doubt; assume that they
weren't aware of the rules and thought there was nothing wrong with what
they were doing.  (As an aside, had the user chosen the username "Klff
Hanger", and made a few contributions to articles, I don't even see a rules
violation, though I admit I'm not up to date on the current !rules.  I can
think of lots of user pages which are self-promotional.)

Of course, this brings up another issue, which I think is the real problem
with indexing user and user talk pages (as well as project and project talk
pages).  User pages probably *should* be in search engines, they just
shouldn't be ranked nearly as highly as they tend to be.

In hindsight, these pages probably should have been put on a different
domain name, and probably a single domain name for all users in all
projects.  That's probably a long way off if it ever gets implemented at all
(with SUL now mostly? complete it's a possibility), but one thing that can
be done today is that nofollow can be applied to links to these pages.  Then
at least the search engines will give them a lower rank.  Maybe I should
submit a couple bug reports.
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)]

On 8/5/08, Anthony <wikimail@...> wrote:

>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Jonathan Hughes <lifebaka@...>
> wrote:
>
> > One thing no-indexing user and user talk namespaces would help with is to
> > curb the recent trend of userpage spam.  I see half a dozen or more
> > userpages a day which are spam or masquerading as articles.  If userspace
> > wasn't indexed, pretty soon the companies/persons who attempt this sort
> of
> > advertising will figure out it doesn't work; no one ever finds their
> > "article" from Google or Yahoo.
> >
> > The most recent example that springs into my mind is [[User:Kliff Hanger
> > Dot
> > Com]] (whose page I didn't think spamish enough to delete, though I still
> > blanked it), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kliff_Hanger_Dot_Com .
> > There's no question that page should not be sitting around in userspace
> > where people can Google it.
>
>
> Do you really think noindexing of user pages would make any difference
> there?  The page is obviously self-promotional, but I would think the
> purpose is more to promote oneself to Wikipedians, not to random Google
> searchers.
>
> I don't even agree with you that "there's no question" that user page
> shoudn't be in Google.  Wikipedians seem to have chosen to not allow
> certain
> types of self-promotion on user pages, but that's by no means a policy
> which
> is beyond question.  Most websites *allow* blatant self-promotion on
> people's user page equivalents - for example, Google Knol certainly
> wouldn't
> delete a page like this, and they wouldn't noindex it either.  Unless
> there's some other info I'm missing, I'd assume good faith here and give
> the
> person who created that page the benefit of the doubt; assume that they
> weren't aware of the rules and thought there was nothing wrong with what
> they were doing.  (As an aside, had the user chosen the username "Klff
> Hanger", and made a few contributions to articles, I don't even see a rules
> violation, though I admit I'm not up to date on the current !rules.  I can
> think of lots of user pages which are self-promotional.)
>
> Of course, this brings up another issue, which I think is the real problem
> with indexing user and user talk pages (as well as project and project talk
> pages).  User pages probably *should* be in search engines, they just
> shouldn't be ranked nearly as highly as they tend to be.
>
> In hindsight, these pages probably should have been put on a different
> domain name, and probably a single domain name for all users in all
> projects.  That's probably a long way off if it ever gets implemented at
> all
> (with SUL now mostly? complete it's a possibility), but one thing that can
> be done today is that nofollow can be applied to links to these
> pages.  Then
> at least the search engines will give them a lower rank.  Maybe I should
> submit a couple bug reports.
> _______________________________________________

My initial concerns when I started this thread related primarily to
project-space pages, not userspace, and I would propose that the former be
addressed first to avoid the typical situation where the discussion meanders
in various directions and therefore comparatively little actually gets
done.  There is absolutely no reason that after several months of
discussion DRV, AN/ANI/AN3, SSP, RfCU, WQA, and the former PAIN and CSN
archives are, to the best of my knowledge, still searchable.

My own view with respect to userspace is that the individual user should
probably have the ability to decide whether he or she wants his or her pages
indexed, subject to override where necessary (e.g., an indefblocked user's
page should not be indexed).  I don't have a strong view on whether
userpages should be presumptively indexed with the user having the ability
to opt out, or presumptively no-indexed with the user having the ability to
opt in.

Newyorkbrad
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)]

On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <
newyorkbrad@...> wrote:

>   On 8/5/08, Anthony <wikimail@...> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Jonathan Hughes <lifebaka@...>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > One thing no-indexing user and user talk namespaces would help with is
>> to
>> > curb the recent trend of userpage spam.  I see half a dozen or more
>> > userpages a day which are spam or masquerading as articles.  If
>> userspace
>> > wasn't indexed, pretty soon the companies/persons who attempt this sort
>> of
>> > advertising will figure out it doesn't work; no one ever finds their
>> > "article" from Google or Yahoo.
>> >
>> > The most recent example that springs into my mind is [[User:Kliff Hanger
>> > Dot
>> > Com]] (whose page I didn't think spamish enough to delete, though I
>> still
>> > blanked it), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kliff_Hanger_Dot_Com .
>> > There's no question that page should not be sitting around in userspace
>> > where people can Google it.
>>
>>
>> Do you really think noindexing of user pages would make any difference
>> there?  The page is obviously self-promotional, but I would think the
>> purpose is more to promote oneself to Wikipedians, not to random Google
>> searchers.
>>
>> I don't even agree with you that "there's no question" that user page
>> shoudn't be in Google.  Wikipedians seem to have chosen to not allow
>> certain
>> types of self-promotion on user pages, but that's by no means a policy
>> which
>> is beyond question.  Most websites *allow* blatant self-promotion on
>> people's user page equivalents - for example, Google Knol certainly
>> wouldn't
>> delete a page like this, and they wouldn't noindex it either.  Unless
>> there's some other info I'm missing, I'd assume good faith here and give
>> the
>> person who created that page the benefit of the doubt; assume that they
>> weren't aware of the rules and thought there was nothing wrong with what
>> they were doing.  (As an aside, had the user chosen the username "Klff
>> Hanger", and made a few contributions to articles, I don't even see a
>> rules
>> violation, though I admit I'm not up to date on the current !rules.  I can
>> think of lots of user pages which are self-promotional.)
>>
>> Of course, this brings up another issue, which I think is the real problem
>> with indexing user and user talk pages (as well as project and project
>> talk
>> pages).  User pages probably *should* be in search engines, they just
>> shouldn't be ranked nearly as highly as they tend to be.
>>
>> In hindsight, these pages probably should have been put on a different
>> domain name, and probably a single domain name for all users in all
>> projects.  That's probably a long way off if it ever gets implemented at
>> all
>> (with SUL now mostly? complete it's a possibility), but one thing that can
>> be done today is that nofollow can be applied to links to these
>> pages.  Then
>> at least the search engines will give them a lower rank.  Maybe I should
>> submit a couple bug reports.
>> _______________________________________________
>
>
>
> My initial concerns when I started this thread related primarily to
> project-space pages, not userspace, and I would propose that the former be
> addressed first to avoid the typical situation where the discussion meanders
> in various directions and therefore comparatively little actually gets
> done.  There is absolutely no reason that after several months of
> discussion DRV, AN/ANI/AN3, SSP, RfCU, WQA, and the former PAIN and CSN
> archives are, to the best of my knowledge, still searchable.
>
> My own view with respect to userspace is that the individual user should
> probably have the ability to decide whether he or she wants his or her pages
> indexed, subject to override where necessary (e.g., an indefblocked user's
> page should not be indexed).  I don't have a strong view on whether
> userpages should be presumptively indexed with the user having the ability
> to opt out, or presumptively no-indexed with the user having the ability to
> opt in.
>
> Newyorkbrad
>

As this thread seems to be dying down again, I will take the discussion
on-wiki to [[VP:P]] for further comments (arguably it should have been there
to begin with, although there were reasons I wasn't posting on-wiki for
awhile).  I hope and trust that rapid progress will be made.

Newyorkbrad
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l

[Wily D]

Brad

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Noindexing_Talk_Spaces exists,
which is similar in nature and has a bit of discussion.

Cheers
Brian

On Wed, Aug 13, 2008 at 9:26 PM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia)
<newyorkbrad@...> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 7, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Newyorkbrad (Wikipedia) <
> newyorkbrad@...> wrote:
>
>>   On 8/5/08, Anthony <wikimail@...> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:03 AM, Jonathan Hughes <lifebaka@...>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > One thing no-indexing user and user talk namespaces would help with is
>>> to
>>> > curb the recent trend of userpage spam.  I see half a dozen or more
>>> > userpages a day which are spam or masquerading as articles.  If
>>> userspace
>>> > wasn't indexed, pretty soon the companies/persons who attempt this sort
>>> of
>>> > advertising will figure out it doesn't work; no one ever finds their
>>> > "article" from Google or Yahoo.
>>> >
>>> > The most recent example that springs into my mind is [[User:Kliff Hanger
>>> > Dot
>>> > Com]] (whose page I didn't think spamish enough to delete, though I
>>> still
>>> > blanked it), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kliff_Hanger_Dot_Com .
>>> > There's no question that page should not be sitting around in userspace
>>> > where people can Google it.
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you really think noindexing of user pages would make any difference
>>> there?  The page is obviously self-promotional, but I would think the
>>> purpose is more to promote oneself to Wikipedians, not to random Google
>>> searchers.
>>>
>>> I don't even agree with you that "there's no question" that user page
>>> shoudn't be in Google.  Wikipedians seem to have chosen to not allow
>>> certain
>>> types of self-promotion on user pages, but that's by no means a policy
>>> which
>>> is beyond question.  Most websites *allow* blatant self-promotion on
>>> people's user page equivalents - for example, Google Knol certainly
>>> wouldn't
>>> delete a page like this, and they wouldn't noindex it either.  Unless
>>> there's some other info I'm missing, I'd assume good faith here and give
>>> the
>>> person who created that page the benefit of the doubt; assume that they
>>> weren't aware of the rules and thought there was nothing wrong with what
>>> they were doing.  (As an aside, had the user chosen the username "Klff
>>> Hanger", and made a few contributions to articles, I don't even see a
>>> rules
>>> violation, though I admit I'm not up to date on the current !rules.  I can
>>> think of lots of user pages which are self-promotional.)
>>>
>>> Of course, this brings up another issue, which I think is the real problem
>>> with indexing user and user talk pages (as well as project and project
>>> talk
>>> pages).  User pages probably *should* be in search engines, they just
>>> shouldn't be ranked nearly as highly as they tend to be.
>>>
>>> In hindsight, these pages probably should have been put on a different
>>> domain name, and probably a single domain name for all users in all
>>> projects.  That's probably a long way off if it ever gets implemented at
>>> all
>>> (with SUL now mostly? complete it's a possibility), but one thing that can
>>> be done today is that nofollow can be applied to links to these
>>> pages.  Then
>>> at least the search engines will give them a lower rank.  Maybe I should
>>> submit a couple bug reports.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>> My initial concerns when I started this thread related primarily to
>> project-space pages, not userspace, and I would propose that the former be
>> addressed first to avoid the typical situation where the discussion meanders
>> in various directions and therefore comparatively little actually gets
>> done.  There is absolutely no reason that after several months of
>> discussion DRV, AN/ANI/AN3, SSP, RfCU, WQA, and the former PAIN and CSN
>> archives are, to the best of my knowledge, still searchable.
>>
>> My own view with respect to userspace is that the individual user should
>> probably have the ability to decide whether he or she wants his or her pages
>> indexed, subject to override where necessary (e.g., an indefblocked user's
>> page should not be indexed).  I don't have a strong view on whether
>> userpages should be presumptively indexed with the user having the ability
>> to opt out, or presumptively no-indexed with the user having the ability to
>> opt in.
>>
>> Newyorkbrad
>>
>
> As this thread seems to be dying down again, I will take the discussion
> on-wiki to [[VP:P]] for further comments (arguably it should have been there
> to begin with, although there were reasons I wasn't posting on-wiki for
> awhile).  I hope and trust that rapid progress will be made.
>
> Newyorkbrad
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l@...
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>

_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l@...
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l