#the wikipedia page could use work: flagging this for any other wiki editors | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

cyberleaf69 · 6 years ago

Text

Good morning[Vietnam]! Let's discuss the future that is already here, this morning. I've been working on this ARTICLE for about half a day. I'm using my internet-connection to gather/verify information[all of which is available to you/anyone]. I'm NOT using a SmartPhone. Two reasons for this:1)too slow, & 2)my 'collected' information now 'lives' on my hard-drive. I have opened a new online account. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_threadripper This account allows me to post comments/replies, where them EE's is discussin' our 'futures' in BB-forums[some not recently active; only 9 participants have been active recently]. I can also start a new discussion/TOPIC, which is exactly what I have already done. BAIT for honey-bears, that is linked to my e-mail-account, so I will receive a notification, if any bears come sniffing around! YOU can do the same exact honey-baiting at any public forum; choose from hundreds of thousands w/BB's just like this one; WikiPedia is set up the same way; you can open an account there, and start suggesting 'edits' to ARTICLES there, and even write the first-ever ARTICLE, on any subject that they have no 4-1-1 on; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation If you choose not to register, or you have a conflict of interest but have an idea for a new article with some references, you can create one here and it will be reviewed and considered for publication. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< become a self-proclaimed Professor[the State of Georgia gave me an honorary PhD, when I used one of their online registration 'editors']!; they even INVITE ordinary folks to do just that; if you request the 411 on something they've not heard about before[you can make-up anything at all, & use it as your search-parameter], you will get an INVITATION[but need an account first; they'll gladly guide you through the whole process], and can see what I'm talking about! Now, when I started the research for this ARTICLE, I needed some images for illustration-purposes; for that, I type my search-parameters into Google's search engine, and often without glancing at the return[Google moves all their paying-customers to the top of a very long list; unless you desire to purchase what you just typed-in, you are in deep-doo-doo at Google][I use Yahoo's ask.com, unless I'm shopping for images], I quickly left-click on "IMAGE" above, and up comes a long list of .jpg's; you can visually-scan images a lot faster than you can a list of 'blurbs' from pages you don't need anyway; each photo is 'sourced' from a page, that has a LINK to it; your eye tells you quickly which pages have what you are looking for; these photos are not 'ranked' like the text-returns, but are ranked for closeness to the search-parameters you have entered[a few minor changes to that text, and you quickly have exactly what you need! When examining the photos, of the key-players in the 7nm-lithography business, I kept on seeing two flags[side-by-side] displayed in the background; I grew curious about the frequency of the phenomenon, all over Taiwan/Taipei[two names/two flags]; I started my research on that aspect of the emerging STORY. You will see below, what turned-up.

Only three semiconductor foundries are currently working on a 7nm process: Intel, Samsung and TSMC. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/7_nm_lithography_process

Welcome to the space/time 'present[2019],' where the G-5 network is coming to appliances near you! https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/microarchitectures/zen%2B Linux added initial support for Zen starting with Linux Kernel 4.10. https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/cores/pinnacle_ridge Pinnacle Ridge processors are a refresh of Summit Ridge, fabricated on an enhanced process in order to provide a modest frequency bump. Those processors are a complete system on a chip with both the northbridge and southbridge on-die. Pinnacle Ridge chips offer 16 PCIe lanes (generally for the GPU) along with four additional 4 PCIe lanes for SATA and four USB 3.0 links. Those processors use Socket AM4 and can be extended in functionality with the Socket AM4 chipset which provides support for additional resources (i.e., more PCIe lanes and USB ports).

Intel Corporation is an American semiconductor company. While most notably known for their development of microprocessors and x86, Intel also designs and manufactures other integrated circuits including flash memory, network interface controllers, GPUs, chipsets, motherboards, and computers. In addition to x86, Intel used to also design and manufacture ARM-based chips as well as embed ARC-based cores in their products. While they no longer sell such chips, they still use ARM processors in various products (e.g. in their FPGAs) as well as still retain full a architectural level ARM license allowing them to design and sell their own ARM devices should they wish to.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. is a South Korean multinational electronics conglomerate owned by Samsung Group and accounting for roughly 75% of the group's revenue. Samsung is a major manufacturer of electronic products such as microprocessors, flash memory, and many other integrated circuits. Samsung is also the world's largest manufacturer of mobile phones, tablets, and televisions. On May, 2013 Samsung sold off its S3 families of 4-bit and 8-bit microcontrollers to Ixys, parent of Zilog for $50M.

TSMC http://www.tsmc.com

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is the world's largest pure-play semiconductor foundry.

https://exploretraveler.com/tag/hsinchu-science-and-industrial-park/

https://www.most.gov.tw/?l=en

image from Emirates' aircraft[windows for passengers] The email that Emirates’ Uniform Standards and Development Manager sent out to employees read as follows:

We have been instructed by the Chinese Government that with immediate effect, Emirates airline cabin crew are to follow the One China policy. This means you must remove the Taiwanese flag from your service waistcoat and replace it with the Chinese flag. This must be followed by all Taiwanese crew without exception. Additional stock of Chinese flags have been ordered and expected to arrive in the coming weeks. You will receive an email when they arrive. In the meantime carry the attached letter to show your seniors why you are not wearing a flag.

Then Emirates sent a follow-up email to crew members, “after reviewing [their] responses,” acknowledging that the request was “incorrect and inappropriate.” Here’s what that email said:

After reviewing your responses to the email below the original request for you to wear a Chinese flag was incorrect and inappropriate. Please refrain from wearing your Taiwanese flags on flights until further notice. Therefore no flag is required on your uniform. I do apologize for any upset that I may have caused.

panda says: May 31, 2017 at 10:07 am

@doublejade Emirates clearly stated China was behind their actions in the emails. Instead of hurling insults you should learn how to read.

The request by Emirates would be like Russia asking a US president to wear their flag… oh wait bad example 🙂

AdamR says: May 31, 2017 at 11:20 am

What bugs me most about this is it comes across that EK is flat out lying about the memo/email. At no point do any of the emails paint the situation with a broad, multi-national brush. It VERY specifically states just the countries of Taiwan and China. If this was really a uniform update, then no countries would be singled-out.

So now they’ve essentially looked like assholes for making the lame requirement in the first place. Then they looked like assholes that don’t know how to properly communicate with their employees and had to retract a previous statement. And now they look like lying assholes that STILL don’t know how to communicate at all, either with their employees or the public. The communications team needs some new leadership and/or expertise. Not to mention how poorly written the emails/memos are from a grammatical standpoint. Robert says: May 31, 2017 at 11:29 am

China is at fault for oppressing a country and EK is at fault for enabling that oppression. Lucky highlights the fact that EK doesn’t even own up to it (who would?). David says: May 31, 2017 at 11:36 am

Taiwan now at least is not a country acknowledged by most of the world’s government. Only part of the people in Taiwan hope to be independent. Cipta says: May 31, 2017 at 11:44 am

Well… a corporate exit has been laid. Sure, Taiwan flag is singled out due China’s pressure. Sure, there is pressure from China government to Emirates or maybe UAE. Sure, Emirates wouldn’t want to lose Chinese market.

So, is China is a bully? Is Taiwanese people/FA are victim here? Its funny to read people’s comments here. Sarcasm were thrown without knowledge of China-Taiwan politics and history. Very funny indeed…. Kevin says: May 31, 2017 at 12:13 pm

@doublejade, your ranting sounds pretty clueless. EK’s Standards and Development Manager’s internal email clearly mentioned “We have been instructed by the Chinese Government that with immediate effect”. If the instruction from Chinese government were not true, EK should have clarified it. But instead, EK used a lousy excuse saying ” This email was sent in error and has since been retracted. The intent is to recall the flag pins worn by all our cabin crew was part of our uniform update.”.

How could such intent result in the original email? And how on earth this excuse proved the instruction from Chinese government was untrue? If Chinese government didn’t interfere at all, how would the manager even mentioned that? The excuse at most simply implied the manager should not have sent out that email to stir the controversy.

Unless somehow you find out their manager was actually lying or his/her account was hacked to send a fake email, it’s very logical to assume Chinese government interference on EK’s business is real. Even if the manager sent out that email by accident, that does not change the fact revealed in the mail.

So to me, Lucky drew his judgement based on what presented there. How did it make him close minded? NOW I'M RESEARCHING MR. 'LUCKY' Without getting any deeper here, into History or Politics, I'll simply say that the 'flag-controversy' in Taiwan was not news to me; one of the two flags, in so many of those photos, looks an awful-lot-like one of PUTIN's flags! I'll leave it up to my readers to decide; is there cause for alarm here? *** https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2018/11/22/olympic-referendum-shall-it-be-taiwan-or-chinese-taipei/38584381/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Formosa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Taiwanese_flags#/media/File:Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg - click here to see the 'suspect' 'Russian flag' https://www.most.gov.tw/folksonomy/list?menu_id=ab79b892-bd5b-4285-b544-9e6cc9602c83&l=en&view_mode=listView - MOST

https://eng.taiwan.net.tw/

#taiwan #taipei #wikipedia #ask.com #vladimir putin

3 notes · View notes

libr-tumbl-alternative · 6 years ago

Link

Depending on your search history and interests, there is a decent chance you've come across a number of articles written and edited across Wikipedia and RationalWiki and many other MediaWiki's on the web that were curated by the infamous Oliver D Smith, aka Darryl L. Smith aka Dan Skeptic, aka Krom, aka Atlantid, aka Anglopyramidologist, aka GoblinFace and aka a huge list of sockpuppet editing accounts spread across Wikipedia, Rationalwiki, Encyclopedia Dramatica, and only Google knows what else. Oliver has been featured extensively on Wikipedia We Have a Problem primarily because he is one of my well known online stalkers and harassers I encountered while developing this case study on Wikipedia consensus building. Oliver D Smith has engaged in a four-year-long campaign to target and attack me, first as a method of editor suppression on Wikipedia, where he was working with a small group of skeptic activists, a small but influential subculture on Wikipedia, under an editing account Dan skeptic (contribs). ‎ Dan Skeptic was actually more of a minor actor in the harassment that I received on Wikipedia during the Sheldrake wiki war in 2013, but his participation increased heavily immediately thereafter, as he was the creator of a number of other attack articles written about me, first on RationalWiki, then Encyclopedia Dramatica, then KiwiFarms. It took about two years to finally track and expose Oliver D. Smith in this case study. I wasn't even aware of his participation until I received an email from someone who proposed to me a curious and peculiar threat; delete your articles on GoblinFace/Atlantid or, as he linked to a discussion thread he created, under my real name, arguing against biological evolution in favor of creationism, he would create 500 more just like these on the internet. By these of course he meant impersonations, one of Oliver's key attack strategies on MediaWiki's against other editors he encounters and conflicts with. Oliver D. Smith was impersonating me as a creationist so, he claimed, he could add this to my RationalWiki profile which he noted, already listed me as a promoter of pseudoscience, which he inserted as well. Since combining me with either of these labels is completely removed from who I am, including what I do professionally and what I think privately, it was obvious to me that I was dealing with someone who did not have a firm grip on reality. Disturbing to experience, however, was his ability to publish his own peculiar reality, of which I was a key enemy, across MediaWiki's on the web about me, and then game those articles for peak Google performance in search. More so than any other Wikipedia or RationalWiki editor, Mr. Smith has numerous times crossed the line from online harassment to criminal levels of slander and behaviors. His actions were so extreme at one point that I filed a report with the FBI, a nonworkable path to recourse that was my only option as this individual, a resident of the UK, not the US, continued to target me on the internet. “You idiots don’t seem to realize that I made the Viharo and Jon Donnis pages here, then set up a whole load of other people and turned them against each other, as well as at Rationalwiki. I also added Viharo’s page at Rationalwiki.” – RationalWiki editor “Krom”, one of dozens of accounts operated by the Smith brothers, to sysops at Encyclopedia Dramatica, 2016 From my experience with him, it is likely that his psychology rather than any true ideology is what guides him. His editing history spans everything from white nationalism and neo-nazi MediaWiki MetaPedia, to articles on both the paranormal and skepticism, to left-wing MediaWiki RationalWiki to articles across the web the cover ancient Egypt, pseudoscience, anti-natalism, TombRaider, and whatever ideology he needs to adapt to become accepted by one community to target another. Over two hundred Wikipedia accounts have been discovered on the Smith sock farm, some claiming to be his brother Darryl who is claiming he is responsible, then denying it, and back and forth with layers of confusion, deception all over the web, including impersonating women or other editors Oliver D Smith conflicts with. The only controversial thing I have ever done is create a Rationalwiki article on Rome Viharo. MediaWiki editor skeptic, aka Darryl L Smith, aka Oliver D Smith, defending their actions on Encyclopedia Dramatica. Oliver, in a manner virtually identical to our Twitter president, has a habitual practice of deception. This practice may be more of a result of delusion. Oliver D. Smith believes he is a white knight, a hero on the internet who attacks his foes based on his own pizzagate interpretation of reality, that is, one that is disconnected from consensual reality but relies on emotional reactions to keywords he believes he finds on the web about his targets. Once Oliver finds a keyword written on the web by his targets, he then takes that emotionally charged keyword back to online communities and attempts to build personal armies, developing an emotional and distorted consensus so these platforms will not only join in the attacks but give Oliver a safe harbor to continue them. The strategies Oliver D. Smith employs to accomplish this extend far beyond him just editing articles on various wikis around the web about his targets, they are also entail online impersonations of other users editing accounts, which not only deflects blame from Oliver, but places blame on other users which then riles up communities against each other on the web. This was one of the factors that has contributed to it taking Wikipedia, We Have a Problem over two years to finally identify the author of significant harassment and targeting that I've received. This is how highly toxic digital wildfires and troll farms are able to build communities like PizzaGate or QAnon. Oliver D. Smith shows us how to do that too. His attacks actually show the trail these type of campaigns create on the web. Once an internet user is emotionally charged with any given keyword, they throw critical thinking skills out the window and fail to investigate the flag-waving of sources which misrepresent original context. What is curious about Oliver, however - is his ability to do this with communities that identify as skeptic activists on the internet, communities like RationalWiki and thought leaders of skeptic Wikipedia editing like Tim Farley, communities that would appear to be more critical. Oliver's abuses on the internet I believe help to expose a remarkable vulnerability of the web that all of us are more susceptible to than we are aware. Oliver is taking advantage of a flaw, deeply rooted in human nature and software design flaw. Oliver Smith always claims his innocence, and always confesses his guilt. Oliver D. Smith may be unaware of the very extreme contradictions he makes attempting to cover his tracks across MediaWikis, which are glaringly apparent to anyone who encounters him. I never met you on Wikipedia 4 years ago, that was one of my brothers. So you targeted my whole family out of a grudge of a silly Wikipedia dispute/ban. Oliver D. Smith, in a direct email to me, on file, 2017 Because he both confesses and denies all of his activity on the web, everything Oliver D. Smith says is highly suspicious. There is no brother involved. I made it all up to mislead people stalking me, or trying to investigate who I was (this goes back to when I had trolls following me 24/7 on other websites like Encylopedia Dramatica, Kiwi Farms etc). There's plenty of other false information I fed them and I found the situation rather funny since I fooled most, or all these stalkers. Oliver D. Smith, in a direct email to me, on file, 2018 Whatever guides Oliver D Smith, whether a brother who is deeply involved with Wikipedia editing and certain skeptic activist groups or an out of balance psychology, also has a significant influence on the web via Google search, and this is the tragedy of MediaWiki software. MediaWiki software, the engine the drives Wikipedia communities and dozens of more platforms around the web, in combination with Google search, provides significant global influence via individuals like this, along with the troll farms and agenda operators who collaborate with Oliver and those like him. The other problem with MediaWiki software is there is nothing that can be done about it, at all. That is really what Wikipedia, We Have a Problem validates, the utter failure of all of these communities, platforms, institutions, and even the legal system to do anything about this significant problem. While, in principle, online misinformation, targeted harassment and manipulation can find a solution on Facebook or Twitter, on MediaWiki's - there is literally no solution available. Since the participation is small, even insignificant in comparison to harassment occurring on large platforms of users like Reddit or Twitter, this problem does not obtain much mainstream attention. Pass the buck open source architecture MediaWiki's, as developed in open source by the WikiMedia foundation, put all of the responsibility of the management of the platforms on the users who edit them. As in a legally binding contract. This includes all paths to recourse for any misinformation, slander, fake news, attacks, etc. As long as the community who participates is well-intentioned, rational, and have integrity with the principles of the platform, this isn't a problem. Unfortunately, the web is anything but that. MediaWiki's are one of the few last artifacts of the early, idealistic web - so it is not surprising that the zeal mentioned in many early TED talks (my own included) opined on the great value of software that anyone could edit would easily overlook the social reality that occurs, a silent policy of not everyone should. Before we even address the inherent flaws of the software itself, there apparently is a very high appeal of MediaWikis by those who are on the spectrum with autism, aspergers, or social anxiety disorders. Within Wikipedia's own editing culture, Wikipedia itself is referred to as a honey pot for editors on the spectrum. Autistics can be remarkable editors who are incredibly diligent. The result of this, however, is a community that is unlikely to have much social empathy, a trait often lacking in those with the condition. This naturally exasperates the problem that MediaWikis carry with them. All MediaWiki's empower the users to restrict or police other users activities, within certain boundaries. This means the software that anyone can edit is synonymous with the software that anyone can police, and MediaWiki's give users tools which block, ban, or restrict other users participation. Therefore, MediaWiki software's core design flaw lay in how it creates competition instead of collaboration. This makes MediaWiki's even more problematic - while the software design increases user competition, the rules that govern the community usually instruct collaboration, a contradiction that makes it impossible for a community to responsibly manage itself without a high degree of social empathy. Really? Wikipedia is now being leveraged as the good cop of the internet on Facebook and YouTube, creating more tensions to the prime real estate value to agenda groups and the inherent tensions of the design. I'm all for spontaneous collaboration on the web, but if Wikipedia is the only solution Silicon Valley is offering us in defense of fake news and online misinformation, the web could be lost forever. This tension created by the design flaw in MediaWiki has created dozens of various ideological spin-offs of Wikipedia around the web, all using the same software with slight modifications, including the commercial version of MediaWiki, Wikia. Google's own search algorithm also rewards not just Wikipedia with a high ranking, but any MediaWiki platform. MediaWiki platforms are very easy to optimize for search engine results, and likely in most search returns internet users discover. Oliver D Smith, MediaWiki master. I'm vague on the details, but apparently, Oliver has finally been banned from RationalWiki. It took RationalWiki six years to finally boot him off of their platform. Six years of Oliver using RationalWiki as a platform to target anyone he considered an enemy. Six years of influence on global search results all over the world. After six years, is the web finally free of Oliver D Smith abusing media wikis and Google search? Booted from RationalWiki, Oliver found a new home on another MediaWiki fansite called RationalWiki,Wiki. Since MediaWiki's create a copy of themselves via spats within the previous community, RationalWiki now has RationalWiki, Wiki on Wikia and Oliver D Smith once again as an editor. The unique distinction in this MediaWiki is that it is Wikia, a paid advertising commercial platform MediaWiki site. Like Wikipedia and MediaWiki software, Jimbo Wales commercially successful Wikia was meant to accommodate, and commercialize, niche communities and the advertisers that want to appeal directly to them. It's Wikipedia with a business model. More than just a software platform that anyone can edit, Wikia is a MediaWiki that anyone can publish, simply by creating an account. The RationalWikiWiki is literally a fan wiki that covers all the RationalWiki articles that Oliver edited on RationalWiki, now primarily edited by Oliver who now just writes under his real name, Oliver D Smith - including a RationalWikiWiki article about himself, defending himself from his RationalWiki ban and many events detailed in this study. Oliver uses RationalWikiWiki to continue to attack all of his enemies all over again, of which Wikipedia, We Have a Problem and yours truly is uniquely featured. And you can see that he is the sole author of this latest attack article from the editing history. Wikipedia has blocked over 200 hundred of Oliver's editing accounts, yet it is easy for him to use a fresh IP, and continue where he left off. If that doesn't work, he goes over to RationalWiki, or Encylopedia Dramatica, to continue his obsessions. Even though it took six years to finally remove him from those platforms, he has finally found a new MediaWiki home on Wikia, one that has all the benefits of a high Google search ranking, advertising dollars, and both an algorithm and a set of rules that will allow him to continue for as long as he wants. Welcome to the very real problem of MediaWiki software and the poster boy who teaches all of us developing solutions for the web all the ways these platforms can be readily abused by just about anyone, for any reason - and without any path to recourse. . Powered by AutoBlogger.co

#software #web #technology

1 note · View note

philipfloyd · 7 years ago

Text

Google’s “Mentioned on Wikipedia” Rich Snippets. Can You Promote Yourself on Wikipedia?

Wikipedia is one of the most (if not THE most) authoritative sources on the internet. With an average of 8 billion pageviews every single month and over 6 million articles posted only in the English version of the colossus, Wikipedia claims its well deserved spot as the 5th most visited website of the planet.

Yet, it does not serve any ads to its users. How is this possible? Every other site you visit on a daily basis probably runs ads to survive. How come the 5th most visited site in the world doesn’t? Can it survive solely on donations?

And… is there any way you can promote yourself on Wikipedia, even if it’s forbidden? Let’s find out.

5 Workarounds for Promoting Yourself on Wikipedia

Marketing Play

Conflict of Interests

Getting Links from Wikipedia for SEO

Paying Editors to Write or Edit

Google’s ‘Mentioned on Wikipedia’ Rich Snippets

Why Doesn’t Wikipedia Serve Ads?

How Does Wikipedia Survive?

Donation Controversy

Contributors Number Going Down

5 Workarounds for Promoting Yourself on Wikipedia

Even though there might be no way to directly advertise on Wikipedia, there are clearly ways you can get your brand or message on it. However, self promotion in a very… promotional manner is prohibited. For example, autobiography is not recommended as it cannot be truly objective. In fact, nobody close to you should actually write about you, your company or your products. You can still do it, though. But the risk of it being rejected is high.

But as long as you stick with the community’s standards, you’re definitely good to go. Before we get to the actual things you can do, I’ll share a couple of old stories with you regarding online advertising and Wikipedia.

1. Marketing Play

The famous tire manufacturer Pirelli used it to boast about its advertising prowess, some time ago. Their technique, according to the ad, was to “doctor” Wikipedia articles in a somewhat novel way: by replacing the pictures previously used to illustrate certain Pirelli and tire-related articles with higher-quality images but with a twist. In their own words, what was characteristic of the new images was that “the Pirelli brand appeared on every single image in a super contextual way, turning the image into a powerful ad placement.”

What Pirelli did was to “improve” Wikipedia articles about the brand with high-quality images from their own bank which had the brand name visible in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. While some images only had the brand name visible on tires (not very in-your-face), others were much more obvious, having Pirelli banners at the center and race cars barely in the background. The idea apparently came from advertising agency Havas Digital. Regardless where it came from, it caused quite a stir.

However, hold on your hats, ‘couse it was all fake!

Wikipedia’s reaction was swift and decided that it was all a fake. All changes are carefully and closely tracked by a fierce team of Wikipedia editors. If you’re a brand, that goes double for you. So what were the chances for Pirelli to deploy those changes long enough so that they’d get to capture them for the tire company’s ad? Planting images would ring as big an alarm bell as planting words or links. Administrators of the online crowdsourced encyclopedia were quick to set the record straight and emphasize that their photographs policies are very clear and favor Wikimedia Commons content over proprietary content, even when image quality might be higher for the latter.

There were even people who checked and confirmed at the time that no attempts had been made to change photos on the advertised articles . Perhaps somewhow ironically (depending on your definition of the word), Pirelli didn’t catch that boat even after the incident: there is no mention about this incident on the Wikipedia page for Pirelli, or anywhere else in the encyclopedia, for that matter. But despite that and the fact that Pirelli itself later admitted to it all being a fake and carried out as a guerilla marketing stunt, the idea of “cracking” Wikipedia was planted in the minds of marketers everywhere.

The video was removed from Pirelli Brazil’s Youtube channel , yet copies of the video continued to create uproar. Ralph Traviati, the company’s spoke person stated that the video produced by Harvas was only a demonstration of an initiative that was never implemented. Yet, knowing Wikipedia’s policy towards advertising, why would anyone try to have such an initiative? However, the PR did their part well and some reactions were spawned on Twitter as well, as you can see in the screenshot above.

If you care about your time, don’t waste it on trying to do anything like that. It will get flagged and removed quickly. There are over 100.000 active users and over 1000 admins ready to ban your account and IP. Pirelli was successful in this because it got some coverage in the media. Fake news isn’t very appreciated, however the marketing play above isn’t something people will necessarily dislike.

2. Conflict of Interests

A perhaps even bigger scandal developed in the fall of 2012 and involved accusations of product placement on Wikipedia. What happened was that the Did You Know (DYK) section on Wikipedia was seemingly assaulted by articles about Gibraltar. Sure, it’s an interesting territory, but to appear 17 times in the DYK section in a single month is a feat that borders the unbelievable. Mostly because it is hard to believe that it would pop up “randomly” so many times in a single month (all 17 times happened in August 2012).

So how did a territory of only 2.6 square miles make rounds on Wikipedia’s front page more times than any other subject (bar the Olympics)?

It turns out that these articles were all promoted by Wiki gatekeeper Roger Bamkin, who, incidentally, also happened to have a contract with the government of Gibraltar to publicize the territory on the online encyclopedia. Of course, most Wikipedia editors and board members have other daily jobs, but they’re not supposed to act on them while working for and on Wikipedia. But even though Bamkin’s actions were intuitively wrong, they were in a somewhat gray area: after all, he didn’t go and edit the articles in Gibraltar’s favor (a much more serious offense), he just gave them a gentle push to the front section.

This gray area caused quite a stir among Wikipedia’s editors, with reactions ranging from disinterested to heated and everything in between. Some users even proposed the banning of the involved users. Wikipedia owner Jimmy Wales even came out and declared himself “disgusted” about the situation and requested a five-year ban on the perpetrators. Despite Wales’ attempts at dealing with the situation, things did not get better.

Just months after the original scandal, once the media agitation died out, Gibraltar came back strong in the DYK section.

So why nothing happened at the time? To put it simply, it’s because Jimmy Wales may be the owner, but he’s not the boss. In fact, there is no boss.

That is the beauty but also the problem with crowd-sourced initiatives: they work at a price. And the price is that sometimes there is no conclusion following a dispute.

To us, Jimmy Wales’ idea about the five-year ban might sound reasonable, but it doesn’t mean it’s going to sound the same to the people who are actually doing the work. The talks involving “Gibraltarpedia” on the Wiki talk pages seem never-ending, and opinions about the five-year ban range from “a bit excessive” to “a flat-out terrible idea”. And these are not users who are happy about the Gibraltar scandal (or at least they don’t seem to be), but rather users who seem to genuinely think about the impact of such a measure in the long run.

We invite you to take a look at the screenshot below and judge for yourself weather the Gibraltarpedia follows the rules imposed by Wikipedia itself. Not exactly, huh?

This trick can actually be used if you create a new page on Wikipedia. If you nominate your article it can appear on the HomePage of Wikipedia which could generate a significant amount of traffic. However, certain criteria must be met, like the article not being older than 5 days.

3. Getting Links from Wikipedia for SEO

SEO is also a form of marketing, so getting editors to link to you will help you, one way or another. The links might result in direct traffic or ranking boosts.

I’m sure you’re going to say something about all the links being nofollow, but I can counter that. Nofollow links can actually help you rank better. So if you can get relevant nofollow links, don’t hesitate to do it. Especially from such a highly authoritative source like Wikipedia.

However, creating an entire article requires a significant amount of knowledge. It’s not as easy as editing one. You also have to respect all Wikimedia’s fair use guidelines, otherwise you risk working hours for nothing.

You can start creating by using Wikipedia’s Article Wizard. It’s a good idea to first start with some edits, then work your way up to modifying sections or creating articles from scratch. Wikipedia likes interlinking between its own pages, so make sure you do some of those. Then, you can even start using your own articles/content as sources. A popular method is the broken link building method.

If you’re looking for topics to write about, you can check out the requested articles list. You can in fact list your own article there to request another editor to write it. However, it might take years if not forever for someone to pick it up, as the list is huge and, as I said, the number of contributors is dropping.

4. Paying Editors to Write or Edit

A quick hack into getting listed on Wikipedia or even getting a link might be paying a contributor to write your article or edit an existing one. However, this is easier said than done, as contributors that are paid must disclose this on their profile.

This is pretty much the same story as with SEO paid links. You must disclose the payment through the ‘nofollow’ tag.

You’ll probably find many ‘contributors’ there willing to do this for you. However, they’re basically doing what you would do. Create a fake account, post or modify something, write it poorly, not disclose it and then get banned.

Instead, stick to either the Reward Board, where you can ask existing editors to make some changes or work for you (considering it respects the guidelines, of course) in exchange for a financial reward.

Another way is to rely on professional teams from PR and advertising agencies like Ahn & Co. or EthicalWiki. They both provide guideline compliant Wikipedia writing services and even offer money-back guarantees against deletion. But one thing’s clear: they will be unbiased, so if you did something significantly wrong, it will probably be there. Even if they don’t add it, other editors will.

5. Google’s ‘Mentioned on Wikipedia’ Rich Snippets

One cool side effect of being listed on Wikipedia is the increased chance of being listed into Google’s Rich Results Snippets.

source: thesempost.com

Although suspected to be from WikiPedia, we wouldn’t truly know where the info was coming from unless Google revealed it after multiple complaints from users. The message “Mentioned on Wikipedia” solves the mystery. Thanks to Wikipedia’s well implemented structured data, Google is able to display the magic carousel.

But how can you get there? Well… the first step is to obviously get your brand listed. If it isn’t there, make sure you get there. You should also be listed in the appropriate category page. You can either do it yourself or hire someone to do it for you. Just be careful who you pick.

After that, there’s not much you can do to influence the order of these brands. I don’t know for sure, but it seems like the very popular ones are also the first to show. These snippets don’t even trigger everywhere. I couldn’t get a single one to trigger on my side, for example. Maybe Google’s just testing out.

One smart thing to do would be to follow the framework of a company that’s already listed. If they’ve done it, then it means that they’re doing something right. For example, the first brand from the example above has a very small and incomplete page. They even get some yellow flags, regarding promotional content, which Wikipedia clearly states:

Purina’s page is definitely more detailed and lacking any warnings, but Google doesn’t really seem to care about that. As long as it’s listed in the appropriate category, it can get displayed first.

It seems like Google has a preference for snatching content off Wikipedia to display it in its snippets. If you can get it right and list your content in the right place, you might benefit from being listed number 0 on Google.

Why Doesn’t Wikipedia Serve Ads?

There are many reasons why Wikipedia does not serve ads to its users. All of them combined, make a pretty strong case. Wikipedia’s purpose is to be a source of education for everyone.

We all hate ads. As marketers, we accept them, but deep down inside our hearts, we don’t like them. Running ads on Wikipedia would affect user experience and, more importantly, would create conflicts of interest. Wikipedia is also open source. This means everyone can contribute. Contributors heavily oppose advertising, so running them might cause contributors to leave.

A full list of reasons against advertising on Wikipedia can be viewed here. You can, of course, find pro-advertising reasons as well. However, Wikipedia has been doing just fine without them, so far. We’ll talk about this in a bit.

If you do, however, see advertising on Wikipedia that references something else except Wikipedia itself, then you’re most probably infected with adware or malware.

source: Wikimedia blog

In order to protect yourself, use an anti-virus or anti-malware software to clean your computer. Malwarebytes is a good option, both free and paid. You can also check your browser for unwanted extensions that might cause the issue.

If you see an ad on Wikipedia, it’s probably a virus.

A virus that only shows ads is called an adware. In general, it’s harmless and acts pretty much as an affiliate link, generating some revenue for someone. However, you should clean it as soon as possible, because it can also be a malware, sending you into a rabbit hole and infect your entire network.

All things considered…

Wikipedia doesn’t allow and probably never will allow advertising. In other words, a brand can’t advertise there in a traditional way.

How Does Wikipedia Survive?

Before we get to those workarounds, though, let’s see how Wikipedia has survived so far with no ads at all. Wikipedia survives on donations from its users. This is easier said than done, as donation-based foundations at this scale are very hard to run.

The key term here is value. Since Wikipedia offers a lot of value to all of its users, they’re eager to help. This trust has been built in years of hard work, as Wikipedia wasn’t always all this big and didn’t have such a high amount of readers or donors.

If you’re not familiar with it, Wikipedia periodically displays fundraising banners to ask readers for donations. They take different forms. Here’s just one example:

Even I donate to Wikipedia from time to time. At first, I didn’t like it. It looked just like a beggar asking me for money on the street. However, I gave it some second thoughts when I searched it for an answer on my smartphone, during an exam at school (don’t tell anyone).

Since Wikipedia has so many users, it only needs 1% of them to donate an average of $5 to achieve it’s goal of about $50 million. After all… it’s just the price of a cup of coffee.

youtube

Wikimedia’s fundraising campaigns results are made public and you can actually learn some things from them, because they’re very smart. For example, A/B testing and adding a few lines in the sales copy of the fundraising campaign added a gain of 29% to the number of donations in the U.S.

source: wikimediafoundation.org

But free stuff isn’t enough. Even with no ads, 99.9% of the time people are still unhappy, pointing the irony of Wikipedia’s fundraising banner by saying “”Wikipedia Runs Ads Highlighting Their No-Ad Policy”.

Source: techcrunch.com

However, that’s Wikipedia’s least problem, as media can get pretty harsh when it comes to money coming from donations.

Donation Controversy

In the past few years, Wikipedia has expanded dramatically in terms of servers, staff and fundraising efforts. So much so that in the last couple of years they have well exceeded the needed amount to sustain the website for the year to come.

People have been asking where all this money goes and it’s a fair question. But Wikipedia has been attacked by numerous sources, claiming that they don’t actually need that much money and that they’ve been still asking for more. People have complained about staff travelling to pop concerts to take photos and for allocating $80,000 for a study on editing.

The truth is that The Wikimedia Foundation, responsible for Wikipedia and many other websites actually does a great job at handling the money, with a very high score from Charity Navigator. While the expenses are lower than the donations, it’s not uncommon for non-profit organizations to keep up money in a reserve, for unpleasant situations.

source: businessinsider.com

Now… if you’re so bothered that some employees will go to a couple of concerts off your $5 so you can happily cheat on your exams, then don’t donate. But, in my opinion, a donation based, non-profit organization doesn’t mean that the work there shouldn’t be fun. Do you expect anyone to sacrifice his days so you can know when XYZ was born?

And to question the necessity of an editing study really proves people have no idea what’s going on…

Contributors Number Going Down

Wikipedia is on a shortage of editors. It’s not easy to find volunteers to do this work. However, it has been working fine like this for a long time. People are still helping.

However, they’ve always been complaining about one thing. It’s confusing to edit. Editing can be complicated for newbies. Most readers don’t even have an idea that they can edit. So how can you make it easier for users to edit? How do you know what they like and what they don’t? What’s confusing and what’s not?

Well… you know, you might as well start off by conducting a study… Funded by donations… for a good reason.

Another thing people suggest is that Wikipedia makes a lot of money, while the hard working editors don’t. However, paying editors directly would mean that the project isn’t open source anymore. How would you differentiate between them? Which ones would have more power? Would they write objectively anymore? The only true way of Wikipedia working right is if it uses volunteer editors.

youtube

Paying contributors would result in conflicts of interest and would go against the foundation’s core values. Also, keep in mind that contributors are against running ads, which probably means they’re only doing this because they want to. The reasons why the number of contributors is going down are completely different and can go from difficult user interface to shortage of interesting topics or even conflicts with other contributors (such as deletionists).

Conclusion

Even though there isn’t a direct way to advertise on Wikipedia, there are other subtle ways you can get your name or brand out there. The best way to do it would be to actually contribute to Wikipedia. As long as your source is accurate, nobody will actually mind you placing a link. In fact, nobody will ever know it’s you. This, of course, unless you keep doing it a million times.

If you only edit one topic and always link to the same website it will be very obvious and someone will eventually put you down. Best thing to do is to actually stick to the rules. While it might not bring direct sales, having your name listed on Wikipedia is good for long term brand management.

What do you think of Wikipedia? Have you donated? Would you accept ads on it rather than donations? Have you ever built Wikipedia links to your website? How did that go? Let us know in the comments section, we’re very curious!

The post Google’s “Mentioned on Wikipedia” Rich Snippets. Can You Promote Yourself on Wikipedia? appeared first on SEO Blog | cognitiveSEO Blog on SEO Tactics & Strategies.

from Marketing https://cognitiveseo.com/blog/18988/advertising-on-wikipedia/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes

krisggordon · 7 years ago

Text

Google’s “Mentioned on Wikipedia” Rich Snippets. Can You Promote Yourself on Wikipedia?

And… is there any way you can promote yourself on Wikipedia, even if it’s forbidden? Let’s find out.

5 Workarounds for Promoting Yourself on Wikipedia

Marketing Play

Conflict of Interests

Getting Links from Wikipedia for SEO

Paying Editors to Write or Edit

Google’s ‘Mentioned on Wikipedia’ Rich Snippets

Why Doesn’t Wikipedia Serve Ads?

How Does Wikipedia Survive?

Donation Controversy

Contributors Number Going Down

5 Workarounds for Promoting Yourself on Wikipedia

1. Marketing Play

However, hold on your hats, ‘couse it was all fake!

2. Conflict of Interests

So how did a territory of only 2.6 square miles make rounds on Wikipedia’s front page more times than any other subject (bar the Olympics)?

Just months after the original scandal, once the media agitation died out, Gibraltar came back strong in the DYK section.

So why nothing happened at the time? To put it simply, it’s because Jimmy Wales may be the owner, but he’s not the boss. In fact, there is no boss.

That is the beauty but also the problem with crowd-sourced initiatives: they work at a price. And the price is that sometimes there is no conclusion following a dispute.

We invite you to take a look at the screenshot below and judge for yourself weather the Gibraltarpedia follows the rules imposed by Wikipedia itself. Not exactly, huh?

3. Getting Links from Wikipedia for SEO

SEO is also a form of marketing, so getting editors to link to you will help you, one way or another. The links might result in direct traffic or ranking boosts.

4. Paying Editors to Write or Edit

This is pretty much the same story as with SEO paid links. You must disclose the payment through the ‘nofollow’ tag.

5. Google’s ‘Mentioned on Wikipedia’ Rich Snippets

One cool side effect of being listed on Wikipedia is the increased chance of being listed into Google’s Rich Results Snippets.

source: thesempost.com

Why Doesn’t Wikipedia Serve Ads?

There are many reasons why Wikipedia does not serve ads to its users. All of them combined, make a pretty strong case. Wikipedia’s purpose is to be a source of education for everyone.

If you do, however, see advertising on Wikipedia that references something else except Wikipedia itself, then you’re most probably infected with adware or malware.

source: Wikimedia blog

If you see an ad on Wikipedia, it’s probably a virus.

All things considered…

Wikipedia doesn’t allow and probably never will allow advertising. In other words, a brand can’t advertise there in a traditional way.

How Does Wikipedia Survive?

If you’re not familiar with it, Wikipedia periodically displays fundraising banners to ask readers for donations. They take different forms. Here’s just one example:

Since Wikipedia has so many users, it only needs 1% of them to donate an average of $5 to achieve it’s goal of about $50 million. After all… it’s just the price of a cup of coffee.

youtube

source: wikimediafoundation.org

Source: techcrunch.com

However, that’s Wikipedia’s least problem, as media can get pretty harsh when it comes to money coming from donations.

Donation Controversy

source: businessinsider.com

And to question the necessity of an editing study really proves people have no idea what’s going on…

Contributors Number Going Down

Wikipedia is on a shortage of editors. It’s not easy to find volunteers to do this work. However, it has been working fine like this for a long time. People are still helping.

Well… you know, you might as well start off by conducting a study… Funded by donations… for a good reason.

youtube

Conclusion

The post Google’s “Mentioned on Wikipedia” Rich Snippets. Can You Promote Yourself on Wikipedia? appeared first on SEO Blog | cognitiveSEO Blog on SEO Tactics & Strategies.

from Marketing https://cognitiveseo.com/blog/18988/advertising-on-wikipedia/ via http://www.rssmix.com/

0 notes

cyberleaf69 · 6 years ago

Text

TECHNOPHOBES TAKE NOTE!

I have opened a new online account.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/ryzen_threadripper

This account allows me to post comments/replies, where them EE's is discussin' our 'futures' in BB-forums[some not recently active; only 9 participants have been active recently]. I can also start a new discussion/TOPIC, which is exactly what I have already done. BAIT for honey-bears, that is linked to my e-mail-account, so I will receive a notification, if any bears come sniffing around!

YOU can do the same exact honey-baiting at any public forum; choose from hundreds of thousands w/BB's just like this one; WikiPedia is set up the same way; you can open an account there, and start suggesting 'edits' to ARTICLES there, and even write the first-ever ARTICLE, on any subject that they have no 4-1-1 on; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_creation

If you choose not to register, or you have a conflict of interest but have an idea for a new article with some references, you can create one here and it will be reviewed and considered for publication. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< become a self-proclaimed Professor[the State of Georgia gave me an honorary PhD, when I used one of their online registration 'editors']!; they even INVITE ordinary folks to do just that; if you request the 411 on something they've not heard about before[you can make-up anything at all, & use it as your search-parameter], you will get an INVITATION[but need an account first; they'll gladly guide you through the whole process], and can see what I'm talking about!

Now, when I started the research for this ARTICLE, I needed some images for illustration-purposes; for that, I type my search-parameters into Google's search engine, and often without glancing at the return[Google moves all their paying-customers to the top of a very long list; unless you desire to purchase what you just typed-in, you are in deep-doo-doo at Google][I use Yahoo's ask.com, unless I'm shopping for images], I quickly left-click on "IMAGE" above, and up comes a long list of .jpg's; you can visually-scan images a lot faster than you can a list of 'blurbs' from pages you don't need anyway; each photo is 'sourced' from a page, that has a LINK to it; your eye tells you quickly which pages have what you are looking for; these photos are not 'ranked' like the text-returns, but are ranked for closeness to the search-parameters you have entered[a few minor changes to that text, and you quickly have exactly what you need!

When examining the photos, of the key-players in the 7nm-lithography business, I kept on seeing two flags[side-by-side] displayed in the background; I grew curious about the frequency of the phenomenon, all over Taiwan/Taipei[two names/two flags]; I started my research on that aspect of the emerging STORY. You will see below, what turned-up.

Only three semiconductor foundries are currently working on a 7nm process: Intel, Samsung and TSMC.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/7_nm_lithography_process

Welcome to the space/time 'present[2019],' where the G-5 network is coming to appliances near you!

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/microarchitectures/zen%2B

Linux added initial support for Zen starting with Linux Kernel 4.10.

https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/amd/cores/pinnacle_ridge

Pinnacle Ridge processors are a refresh of Summit Ridge, fabricated on an enhanced process in order to provide a modest frequency bump. Those processors are a complete system on a chip with both the northbridge and southbridge on-die. Pinnacle Ridge chips offer 16 PCIe lanes (generally for the GPU) along with four additional 4 PCIe lanes for SATA and four USB 3.0 links. Those processors use Socket AM4 and can be extended in functionality with the Socket AM4 chipset which provides support for additional resources (i.e., more PCIe lanes and USB ports).

TSMC http://www.tsmc.com

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) is the world's largest pure-play semiconductor foundry.

https://exploretraveler.com/tag/hsinchu-science-and-industrial-park/

https://www.most.gov.tw/?l=en

The email that Emirates’ Uniform Standards and Development Manager sent out to employees read as follows:

Then Emirates sent a follow-up email to crew members, “after reviewing [their] responses,” acknowledging that the request was “incorrect and inappropriate.” Here’s what that email said:

panda says: May 31, 2017 at 10:07 am

@doublejade Emirates clearly stated China was behind their actions in the emails. Instead of hurling insults you should learn how to read.

The request by Emirates would be like Russia asking a US president to wear their flag… oh wait bad example 🙂

AdamR says: May 31, 2017 at 11:20 am

Taiwan now at least is not a country acknowledged by most of the world’s government. Only part of the people in Taiwan hope to be independent. Cipta says: May 31, 2017 at 11:44 am

So to me, Lucky drew his judgement based on what presented there. How did it make him close minded? NOW I'M RESEARCHING MR. 'LUCKY'

Without getting any deeper here, into History or Politics, I'll simply say that the 'flag-controversy' in Taiwan was not news to me; one of the two flags, in so many of those photos, looks an awful-lot-like one of PUTIN's flags! I'll leave it up to my readers to decide; is there cause for alarm here? *** https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2018/11/22/olympic-referendum-shall-it-be-taiwan-or-chinese-taipei/38584381/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Formosa

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Taiwanese_flags#/media/File:Flag_of_the_Netherlands.svg - click here to see the 'suspect' 'Russian flag'

https://www.most.gov.tw/folksonomy/list?menu_id=ab79b892-bd5b-4285-b544-9e6cc9602c83&l=en&view_mode=listView - MOST

https://eng.taiwan.net.tw/

#technophobia #taiwan #taipei #chip_architecture #electrical_engineers #the_future_is_now

0 notes