МАВЗОЛЕЙ ЛЕНИНА - ЭТО ВОЛЯ НАРОДА

ŞACALII

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog :МАВЗОЛЕЙ ЛЕНИНА - ЭТО ВОЛЯ НАРОДА

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog

Collage:
МАВЗОЛЕЙ ЛЕНИНА - ЭТО ВОЛЯ НАРОДА

Evenimentul Zilei Nr. 5007

Joi, 29 Noiembrie 2007, 22:24

Acuzat in atentatele de la Europa Libera, fostul spion l-a gasit partener de afaceri pe Teodorescu - ex-sef in Contraspionaj si membru intr-o retea prospera de colonei afaceristi


1
De la Carlos "Sacalul" la "Top 300"








30 Noiembrie 2007
Mihai Munteanu, Laurentiu Mihu





Au spionat Occidentul servind, loiali, regimul comunist. Dupa Revolutie au devenit capitalisti feroce.

Dupa ce au sabotat radioul anticeausist, au folosit teroristi si au spionat Vestul, fostii ofiteri DIE fac afaceri cu personaje din lumea mondena. Au spionat Occidentul capitalist servind, loiali, regimul comunist. In timpul Razboiului Rece au fost trimisi la post, dincolo de Cortina de Fier, penetrand informativ institutiile vestice. Revolutia i-a intors 180 de grade, iar spionii ceausisti au devenit capitalisti.

Constantin Ciobanu - colonel DIE (r), acuzat de implicare in atentatele de la Europa Libera, alaturi de temutul terorist Carlos „Sacalul”.
Filip Teodorescu - colonel (r) DIE, ex-sef al Directiei a III-a (Contraspionaj) a Securitatii. In anii ‘90, a fost consilierul directorului SRI. In tranzitie, Ciobanu si Teodorescu s-au retras in afaceri. Si-au privatizat relatiile si s-au asociat cu fosti lucratori din Comertul Exterior comunist - institutie de aco-perire pentru spionajul romanesc.

COLONELUL CIOBANU





Spioni sub acoperire ajunsi la abatoare si cuie





„Cum ai dat tu de mine? Sunt ocupat! Ce ma intrebi despre cacaturi? (...) Bine, hai, asa, pentru tine, sa ne vedem cinci minute. Fixez eu locul. Port basca si un pardesiu.” Cateva ore mai tarziu, interlocutorul apare in intersectia stabilita. Locul ales, o pizzerie, „pentru ca sigur au si bere”.

Pe suspiciosul personaj il cheama Constantin Ciobanu. In anii ‘80, serviciile secrete occidentale, inclusiv CIA, l-au identificat drept complice la sabotajele de la Europa Libera. Era atunci diplomat in Ambasada Romaniei de la Bonn (RFG) si seful „recrutarilor”, informatie pe care Ciobanu nu o neaga.

In ‘84, dupa atentatul cu bomba, a fost expulzat, la pachet cu alti patru colegi: Ion Constantin, Ioan Lupu, Ion Grecu si Dan Mihoc. A parasit imediat MAE, dupa o activitate de cinci ani, cat un episod din cariera sa adevarata: de ofiter de informatii.

Azi, Constantin Ciobanu e la pensie si membru in Asociatia rezervistilor SIE. „Apartin si eu de un club, ca in orice casta”. De aproape doi ani sustine ca a iesit si din afaceri. Dar la Registrul Comertului inca figureaza ca actionar la patru societati. Altfel, Europa Libera i se pare „un hardau de cacat”, iar acuzatiile, „niste cacaturi”.

Amic cu Isarescu, Dijmarescu si Pascu





Iesirea din MAE nu a fost o tragedie. „Eu toata viata am lucrat „acoperit”„, a povestit Constantin Ciobanu pentru EVZ. A actionat in Japonia, unde i-a fost interceptat un bagaj doldora cu informatii tehnologice, dar si la Londra, acoperit ca expert la Institutul de Economie Mondiala (IEM) din Bucuresti. A petrecut astfel opt ani (‘71-’79) sub ochii MI 5 (Contraspionajul britanic - n.r.), in spionajul economic.

In IEM Ciobanu a cunoscut si „oameni de calitate”: pe Mugur Isarescu, Eugen Dijmarescu (guvernatorul, respectiv, viceguvernatorul BNR - n.r.), Ioan Mircea Pascu (europarlamentar si ex-ministru al apararii in guvernul Nastase - n.r.). S-a intersectat si cu Mihai Croitoru, fost spion si cumnat cu Isarescu. L-a cunoscut la Londra si confirma povestea plecarii lui Croitoru din post, dupa un scandal legat de sotia cleptomana.

Afaceri cu Crescent

Dupa Revolutie insa, Ciobanu a intrat in afaceri, pe import-export de mobila si produse chimice. Nu a inceput cu bani multi, dar a avut informatii si a gasit parteneri in tara, in Europa si in Asia care i-au achitat serviciile in avans.

Printre ei s-au numarat si doua firme ale fostei Securitati: Crescent si Mineral Import-Export. Amicii de la Crescent i-au mijlocit un imprumut de 5.000 de dolari. Banii i-a returnat cash, apoi a rupt contractul. Prin Mineral, in schimb, a primit contracte. „Mineral Import-Export era pe duca, asa ca mi-au dat si mie o felie”, recunoaste Ciobanu.

Pentru a rezista in economia de piata s-a asociat cu Filip Teodorescu. Se stiau de cand Teodorescu activa in spionaj, in Turcia, pentru ca apoi sa preia sefia Contraspionajului ceausist.

Intre 2002-2005 au detinut impreuna o firma (Aliment Serv), adica un abator prin care furnizau carne comunitatii evreiesti din Romania. Tot impreuna au produs cuie, dupa ce au obtinut de la un partener indian un utilaj, drept compensare. Afacerea a sucombat insa, intrucat erau prea mici pe o astfel de piata, iar muncitorii ii furau pe rupte.

Cel de-al cincelea acuzat in afacerea Europa Libera este Ion Grecu, pe care Ciobanu spune ca nu l-a „avut niciodata la inima”. Dupa ‘90, Grecu ar fi intrat in afaceri cu case de schimb valutar, luandu-si ca asociati niste arabi.

GRUPAREA FILIP TEODORESCU-MARGINEAN-MATICIUC





„Reteaua Poponet”





Descurcaret, Filip Teodorescu, asociatul spionului rezervist Constantin Ciobanu, e si in afaceri mai profitabile. Fost sef in Directia a III-a Contraspionaj, Teodorescu este vicepresedintele Consiliului de Administratie (CA) al Grivita SA (metale feroase si semifabricate). Societatea a fost vanata de rechinii tranzitiei pentru patrimoniul ei imobiliar: peste 35.000 mp in sectorul 1 al Capitalei, unde metrul patrat trece de 1.000 de euro.

Initial, Grivita a fost preluata de la stat de miliardarul Stefan Marginean, prin casa lui de comert, Metanef. Potrivit surselor EVZ, Marginean a fost colonel DIE. Dupa ‘89, ca om de afaceri, fostul spion patroneaza un adevarat imperiu metalurgic si are o avere de peste 30 de milioane de euro.

Tun imobiliar





In martie 2006, Stefan Marginean a vandut 40% din Grivita SA. Pretul: doar 2,66 milioane de euro, achitati de dezvoltatorul imobiliar Metropolis Real Estate Developers, controlat de Ion Maticiuc si fiul sau, Codin (foto). Primul e unul dintre magnatii discreti ai Romaniei, imbogatit, in buna parte, din contracte cu statul. In mediul de afaceri, averea sa e estimata la 75 de milioane de euro. Inainte de ‘89, a activat in comertul exterior.

Fiul sau, Codin Maticiuc, este cunoscut in „piata” mondena din Bucuresti drept cel mai strident „baiat de bani gata”. E poreclit „Poponet”, iar lumea sa se imparte intre masini scumpe, femei celebre, consumatii de zeci de mii de euro in cele mai fitoase cluburi din Capitala, dar si beizadele celebre: Elena Basescu, Andrei Hrebenciuc sau Alin Cocos (fiul lui Dorin Cocos).

Pretul „prietenos” platit de Maticiuc lui Marginean pentru Grivita se explica si prin vechile relatii care ii leaga. Inainte de preluare, Maticiuc chiar a administrat societatea. Cot la cot cu vicepresedintele CA, Filip Teodorescu, care a sprijinit tranzactia in dauna unor investitori israelieni. Acestia ar fi preluat terenurile contra noua milioane de euro.

Colonelul (r) Teodorescu sustine ca a iesit din joc: „Domne’, eu nu mai sunt in CA la Grivita de anul asta. Deocamdata nu se construieste nimic acolo. Societatea tot cuie face, laminate”. In rest, fostul securist are talent de negustor: „Nu stiu daca Maticiuc a lucrat in Securitate (rade). Domne’, nu vand informatii. Eu sunt prea scump, dumneavoastra prea zgarciti. Faceti-mi o oferta si mai vorbim (rade smechereste)”.

Codrin Maticiuc („Poponet”) se face ca ploua. Sustine ca habar nu are ce se intampla cu terenul Grivita, detinut de firma controlata de el si tatal sau. Intrebat daca Ion Maticiuc a lucrat in Securitate si in comertul exterior, Poponet a ingaimat scurt: „...va sun eu inapoi”. Si n-a mai sunat, pana la inchiderea editiei.

Ei si ai lor





Cei doi Maticiuc au preluat pe piata RASDAQ si alte actiuni ale companiei (pana la 92,1a) prin brokerul SSIF Unicapital. Aici apare un alt personaj interesant: Valeriu Vasile Velciu (candidat PRM la Senat, in 2004). Acesta controleaza SSIF Unicapital, societate de investitii infiintata de Constantin Iavorski - fost general KGB si ministru al energiei in Republica Moldova - care a capusat importurile energetice (carbune si pacura) ale Termoelectrica. Valeriu Vasile Velciu a fost asociat si in alte firme cu Iavorski si capitanul (r) SRI Constantin Alexa.

Din ‘84 pana la Revolutie, acelasi Velciu a fost secretarul Directiei America din Ministerul Comertului Exterior (MCE) si atasat comercial la New York. Ulterior, a devenit directorul societatii Automatica (patronata si de Ion Maticiuc) care a primit contracte fara licitatie de la Nuclearelectrica, pentru Unitatea 2 de la Cernavoda. Conexiunile continua: Maticiuc -”Poponet” e asociat cu Velciu si in Unisecurity SA - firma de securitate infiintata tot de Iavorski.

UN FIU DE SRI-ST, TOFAN SI OMUL LUI SOV





Suveica din umbra





Interesele lui Ion Maticiuc sunt transfrontaliere. In Londra, pe malurile Tamisei, miliardarul a infiintat compania Petrochem Limited. Aici este asociat cu un afacerist misterios de origine romana, dar cu cetatenie elvetiana. Se numeste Florin Dima si locuieste in Geneva. In Tara Cantoanelor, Dima administreaza, la randul sau, cateva firme care opereaza in Romania.

Una dintre acestea se numeste Solexim Saarl (adresa: Rue de Roverray 20, CP 506 Geneva) si detine un pachet de 25% din societatea romaneasca Ice Blink Consulting SRL, cu sediul in Bucuresti si specializata pe consultanta in domeniul energiei eoliene. Asociatul majoritar (75%) din Ice Blink Consulting este Lucian Badescu, fiul colonelului SRI Dumitru Badescu - fost sef al Diviziunii de Contrainformatii Economice cadrul SRI.

Despre Lucian Badescu, EVZ a dezvaluit ca facea parte dintre actionarii unei firme (Green Energy) de „baieti destepti” care alimenta Rafinaria Rafo Onesti cu energie electrica cumparata ieftin de la stat (complexurile Rovinari si Turceni). Afacerea este investigata de DNA. Ieri, Lucian Badescu ne-a declarat ca „Ice Blink este o investitie imobiliara. Il cunosc pe Florin Dima, dar nu stiu cu ce s-a ocupat inainte”.

Omul lui Vintu





Societatea Ice Blink Consulting este legata si de magnatul Gheorghe Tofan, cu care s-a asociat intr-o terta firma (Tofan Agro Investments). Suveica insa nu se opreste aici. Ice Blink detine o treime din compania romaneasca Wind Expert SRL (energie eoliana).

Printre fondatorii celei din urma s-a numarat si Dan Stratan, omul de incredere al lui Sorin Ovidiu Vintu - „parintele FNI”. Stratan a fost presedintele grupului Gelsor si, acum, reprezinta in Romania off-shore-ul prin care Vintu patroneaza compania Petromservice - „capusa” Petrom. Stratan a cedat, recent, o treime din Wind Expert unui interpus.

DICTIONAR DE PERSONAJE





Stefan Marginean - colonel DIE.
A lucrat in MCE-ul comunist. Acum e presedintele casei de comert Metanef. Conduce un imperiu siderurgic, face afaceri cu oligarhii rusi, e asociat cu arabul controversat, Fathi Taher, si a fost partener cu Dan Voiculescu „Felix” si cu evazionistul mondial Marc Rich. Averea sa depaseste 30 de milioane de euro.

Constantin Ciobanu - colonel DIE.
A activat, sub acoperirea Institutului de Economie Mondiala, in Anglia, ca „diplomat” in Germania, dar si in Japonia. E acuzat in cazul atentatelor de la radioul anticeausist Europa Libera, ca si complice al celebrului terorist, Carlos „Sacalul”.

Filip Teodorescu - colonel DIE.
A spionat, sub acoperire, in Turcia. Ulterior, a ajuns loctiitor al sefului Directiei Contraspionaj din Securitate. In ‘90 a fost inchis pentru reprimarea Revolutiei de la Timisoara, dar achitat in ‘91 pentru a deveni consilierul lui Virgil Magureanu, primul director SRI, care i-a si facut propunerea cand l-a vizitat in spatele gratiilor.

Valeriu Velciu - a activat in „Directia America” din MCE.
In afaceri, s-a asociat cu Constantin Iavorski (fost general KGB) si Constantin Alexa, un controversat ofiter (r) SRI.

Ion Maticiuc - fost angajat in MCE, detine o avere de peste 75 milioane euro. Participa in Automatica SA Bucuresti, deruland contracte cu Garda de Mediu si urmatoarele companii de stat: CNE Invest Cernavoda, Termoelectrica SA, Hidroelectrica SA, Compania Nationala a Lignitului Oltenia, Daewoo Mangalia Heavy Ind.

Codin Maticiuc - beizadeaua lui Ion Maticiuc e poreclit „Poponet”.
Este celebru in „high-life”-ul bucurestean pentru aventuri cu frumusetile mondene (Gina Pistol, Ana Maria Ferencz, Roxana de la Trident, Corina Zugravu), masinile din dotare (Ferrari, Porsche, Mercedes, Maseratti) si cheltuielile extravagante din cluburile de fite.





Cititi si:





Radio Europa Libera a ajuns la cinema





"Domnul IKEA" face cat toti romanii din Top 300

| Copyright | Ringier Romania |

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog:The Dark Side of Wikipedia

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog


The Dark Side of Wikipedia

Posted by randfish on Tue (11/20/07) at 12:44 AM Spamming & Black Hat

Biased manipulation runs wild on Wikipedia, and the extent to which it influences the pages of that site will probably never be known. In the field of SEO, where every link counts, Wikipedia's reference links at the bottom of articles and their external links in the body text of articles were once considered search engine ranking gold. Early this year, Wikipedia moved to institute nofollow on all outbound links, and many presumed the controversy would die there. It hasn't.

I think the best way I can illustrate this massive problem is to attack the most common questions that come up around Wiki-hacking (yes, I'm inventing a moniker so I don't have to say "editing Wikipedia from a biased perspective in inaccurate, misleading or mis-representational ways" every time). Those who frequent Wikipedia would probably consider these edits to be "vandalism," but that's a very inaccurate representation of the actions that are actually happening. Vandalism refers to intentional destruction or damage of property - in the offline world, think graffiti or bricks through a window. These Wikipedia edits are, primarily, intended never to be detected by other Wikipedia editors or the outside world - a better analogy might be the subtle manipulation of a news report to slant in favor of a political party or candidate.

Wikipedia Meets a Black Hat

Some major questions and issues:

Why Edit Wikipedia Pages if There's No Link Juice?

* Reputation Management - if Wikipedia has bad things to say about a topic, there will almost certainly be someone who wishes to see that information removed.
* Link Traffic - Wikipedia articles, due to their phenomenal overrepresentation in search engines, can drive a remarkable amount of traffic, so many wiki-hacks are simply attempts to boost click-throughs
* Promotion - If you were a cellphone company, you might seriously consider editing the Wiki article on cellphone retailers, possibly adding a link to a list of "highest rated" stores by consumers according to a bogus study you host on your site (or another site) and then copying that list in short-format on the Wikipedia entry. Other promotional tactics are less obvious, but often more difficult to identify. And, yes, that story is a modified version of a true instance of Wiki-promotion.
* To Spite - If your competitor is ranking ahead of you on Google, or kicking you around in sales, you might find that Wikipedia is an excellent place to create a page on their company and detail the long list of terrible misdeeds they've committed. What's great (or horrible) about this practice is that generally, they'll be the ones who later come in and look like spammers for erasing the content or trying to have it removed, which actually helps to bolster the veracity of information in the eyes of other editors or administrators. It's a dirty but highly effective tactic to leverage against an opponent. I've even heard a story about using this technique for blackmailing the company referenced in the negative article, and pretending to "switch sides" in the editorial debate on the talk page once the money had been paid (it's DMOZ all over again!).
* For Link Juice - Wait, I thought there was no link juice on Wikipedia... Well, not directly. But, Wikipedia is such a reference resource that if your site earns links on popular pages, you'll find that those links find their way into forums, blog posts, articles, and journalistic publications more often than not. This is probably one of the most clever ways to use Wikipedia, because you'll need to link to something worthy of being spread, anyway, which probably means that even a heavy-handed Wiki-editor won't remove it, as it's typically relevant enough and interesting enough to belong there. One might even argue that this isn't Wiki-Hacking at all (perhaps it's the linkbait of Wikipedia?).
* To Earn Credit - The Wikipedia hierarchy rewards frequent, positive edits, and for many Wiki-hackers this is a great way to build up a solid, respectable-looking profile and potentially even be rewarded with administrator status.
* Wiki-Jacking - Since I've written about this topic previously, I won't cover it again in-depth.

How Do Malicious Edits Happen?

* Anonymously - As of now, users can still make edits anonymously without logging in. Granted, Wikipedia will record your IP address, but you don't have to provide any personal information (not even fake stuff).
* Through Proxies - When one anonymous account just won't do, or you don't want the anonymous account to have any connection to your other account(s), using a proxy IP address lets you connect through to Wikipedia largely undetected (so long as the proxy provides solid anonymity).
* Through Trusted Accounts - For the more experienced Wiki-Hackers, a trusted account is a must have. Trusted accounts that make dozens of edits each day are much less likely to be accused of manipulation or have their content modified by another editor, even if complaints arise.
* Via Multiple Accounts with History - The savviest of Wiki-Hackers I've talked to runs more than a dozen unique, trusted accounts with positive history, and can use these

What are Some of the Best/Worst Stories I've Heard?

* The Sock Puppet Betrayer - This is second-hand, so the details might be fuzzy, but the basic approach was sheer genius. Basically, this Wiki-Hacker created several accounts on different IPs, then vandalized a number of pages, mostly small and under-the-radar, appearing to look like a competitor (adding links, references, promotional content, etc). He then "investigated" these pages through his trusted account, "found" the "spammers," removed their content, and was praised by some other community editors. Later, he used the newfound trust to create subtle, but effective references for his own client.
* The Account Buyer - Supposedly, this fellow has been tracking down Wikipedia editors and offering to buy their account user names and passwords for the "trust" they've earned. According to him, he's only got 4 so far, but these have all been used effectively to help create and then "back up" favorable changes to a number of pages in a specific vertical.
* The Talker - One of the smartest Wiki-Hackers, in my opinion, is barely an editor of content at all, but simply uses a well-liked editorial account on Talk Pages, helping to sway the discussion in favor of keeping/removing links & content. On rare occasion, rather than actually making changes, the Talker will simply suggest that certain edits be made, then use a secondary or anonymous account to complete them if there's no pushback.
* The Bad Mouther - This particular Wiki Hacker got caught by another editor and in order to save himself, dug through every edit his accuser had ever made, and ended up being able to keep not only his account, but his edits by making it appear that the accuser was actually an "SEO," whose perspective and judgment were biased.

Why Don't Administrators Stop this Behavior?

They do, actually. You can see this popular project page called WikiProject Spam, where a "spamstar of glory" (yes, seriously) is awarded for stopping spammers on Wikipedia. A fairly immense to-do list exists on this page, and it's actually one of the Wiki-Hackers' most feared pages. Unfortunately, it's also a tool - Wiki-Hackers who want information removed or who want to build up the "trust" of their own accounts will actually become spam investigators and reporters. One of the best ways to reach administrator level is actually to catch some of the "trusted" accounts that are actually other Wiki-Hackers, and thus the community of Wiki-Hackers is not on particularly good terms with one another. Turning in other hackers puts you above suspicion in a way that few other actions on Wikipedia can, and thus, it's one of the holy grails of the infiltrator-style hackers.

How do You Know All This, Rand?

Two ways, really. First, I've played around first-hand with some of the pages with Wikipedia. In fact, prior to the "nofollow" implementation on links, I personally had a few editorial accounts through proxy IP addresses, though I probably haven't actively edited Wikipedia pages in the last 9 months. Instead, I've been connecting over email and in-person with a lot of folks who run reputation management and link building campaigns that do leverage Wikipedia. The number of stories, depth of detail, and actual examples (which I obviously can't share without betraying a lot of trust), including the stories I've recounted above, paint a fairly dark picture of what's actually happening at Wikipedia.

Granted, because of my profession, I'm almost certainly getting an overrepresentation of the more manipulative aspects of what happens on Wikipedia. It's only natural. While lots of experienced Wiki-Hackers love to share their favorite stories of manipulating the site, very few of the truly quality editors are A) ever going to meet me at a party or go get some drinks with me at a conference bar, or B) boast about the terrific article they created about 70s-style tube socks as fashion accessories.

Please do note that the specific stories I've recounted above have had details removed or even slightly modified to keep the identities of my sources anonymous. A couple, as I noted, are second-hand, as well, so I'm guessing some details may be missing. However, even with the details missing, you can still get a sense of the tactics for manipulation and the extent to which people are willing to go to in order to change Wikipedia in their favor.

One Quick Example from the Site

This comes from two friends at Wikipedia who really are legitimate editors and spam fighters, Jon Hochman (one of the foremost authorities on Wikipedia & SEO) and Durova (who spoke at SMX Social in October and had this terrificly informative interview over chat with Jim Hedger). From Durova's Talk Page Archives:

I just spent 50 minutes playing cat and mouse with a vandal, and WP:AIV still hasn't acted on my block request. I guess its time to ask for the tools. What do you think? Jehochman (talk/contrib) 04:45, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Done, 24 hour block. Sometimes it feels good to have the tools. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers, DurovaCharge! 04:48, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

This one is using proxies. He's over here now: 142.179.62.0 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log) Jehochman (talk/contrib) 04:53, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
I think we are dealing with a black hat SEO who may be using some sort of script. I see a pattern in the edits. My suspicion is that they want one specific reference gone, and are attacking all of them to create confusion. Can we semi-protect the targeted articles, starting with Traffic Power? Jehochman (talk/contrib) 05:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Am I caught up on the blocks? Keep me apprised; I'm working on a complex investigation with another editor atm. DurovaCharge! 05:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Semi-protecting. Give me the full list. DurovaCharge! 05:07, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Blocks are good. Here are the targeted articles. I think he'll be back soon. Jehochman (talk/contrib) 05:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, this example above is a very amateur attempt, and Jon & Durova are all over it. Professional-level Wiki-Hacking is much more difficult to rat out.

The most frustrating part for Wikipedians has to be that they themselves receive no financial reward for their efforts, yet their opposition, the Wiki-Hackers, benefit monetarily and directly when they have success penetrating the spam police.

Do all of these Wiki-Wars Really Matter?

The most accurate answer is probably "it depends." It's very hard to gauge how much the public trusts information on Wikipedia. My gut tells me that, sadly, a lot of people simply accept whatever Wikipedia says without checking real sources of information (yes, I'm saying that Wikipedia by its very nature is untrustworthy, even if 95%+ of the information there is factual, which is probably a big stretch). However, I can say with some certainty that businesses and individuals get a great deal of value and suffer a great deal of loss when Wikipedia contains positive/negative information about them (very similar to Google or other search engines). Thus, a secondary "black" market will always exist to exploit the site and attempt to change information. Even if Wikipedia went into immediate lockdown mode, there would be auctions for trusted editorial accounts, devious manipulation, and, probably, an even higher price on all of the Wiki-Hacking style activities.

There's no real solution to the cat-and-mouse game, unless Jimbo wants to turn Wikipedia into some sort of Mahalo-like resource, where only those invited can edit (and even then, I'm guessing it will just mean higher prices, not an end to hacking).

p.s. Yes, the nofollows on all links to Wikipedia are intentionally "nofollowed." Someone should create a blog plug-in to auto-nofollow Wikipedia links so the site stops ranking atop every query in existence.

p.p.s. None of the content in this post is intended to suggest that I don't respect the project, its aims, or the lofty aspirations of many of the hardworking people trying to make it a good resource. In fact, I believe quite the opposite - that folks like Durova, in particular, and others like here have a noble, self-sacrificing streak that's both rare and praise-worthy. But, depending on your view of Wikipedia and black/gray hat social media practices as a whole, you might find some of her opponents equally admirable, or at least, impressively creative.
Do you like this post?
"
Tags: http://tagged.com/sinadam | Edit Tags


Printable View This message is not flagged. [ Flag Message - Mark as Unread ]
From: "SEOmoz" Add to Address BookAdd to Address Book Add Mobile Alert
To: sin_dumitru2001@yahoo.com
Subject: This Newsletter Will Self-Destruct in 43,200 Minutes
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 14:07:04 -0600
Howdy SEOmozzers,

Welcome to our November newsletter. We're excited to bring you all sorts of great links and information, but we're not huge fans of the long-form emails, and hopefully you'll appreciate the brevity as well. Without further ado:

* Marketplace is a Hit - The SEOmoz Marketplace has grown tremendously, with hundreds of firms in the search space registering profiles, posting job listings & generating business. If you need to hire, want to be hired, or just want to increase your networking visibility, it's a must.
* Pubcon Vegas starts next Tuesday, and 7 SEOmozzers will be in attendance. We're throwing a reservations required bash with werewolves and playing cards and famous SEOs, so make sure to register if you'd like to come.
* Premium Content Grows - We've had significant upgrades to premium content in the last 30 days, including an updated version of the Term Targeting Tool that now grades your pages based on how well you're using keywords. We've also added search to the Q+A knowledge base, giving you access to 650+ threads.
* Best of the Blog - The last 30 days have seen some incredibly popular posts from the SEOmoz blog, including:
o The Dark Side of Wikipedia – Rand's rundown of how Wikipedia is still used to manipulate rankings, despite their site-wide use of nofollow on external links.
o Google's Sitelinks and Brand Domination through Keyword Ownership - How you can reach coveted "sitelink" status, what it means and what can prevent you from achieving it.
o How PageRank Works & Why The Original PR Formula May be Flawed – Our own engineering guru, Si, breaks down (in extraordinary depth) how PageRank calculates the flow and attribution of link juice, problems with leaks and much more.
o Dave Naylor in Three Acts – One of the most respected (and notorious) SEOs in the world, Dave Naylor, dropped by to film a jumbo-sized, three part Whiteboard Friday not to be missed. Dave and Rand discuss the PageRank update, ranking signals, temporal link models, and even a few sneaky blackhat tactics; all in inimitable Dave Naylor style.
* Secrets from the Future - We can't actually tell you what we're planning to launch in January, but we can say this - it's going to be big. Really, really big. OK - Here's a hint - it's called "SEO Analytics." That's all we're saying. That, and we're currently offering 20% off passes to SMX West in February, which promises to be the event of the year (Google parties, SEOmoz parties and Silicon Valley in the winter).

That's all folks! As always, thank you so much for your continued readership, support and participation in our community. We've seen some amazing growth this year and we couldn't have done it without you. We hope to see you at one or more of the shows in the upcoming months and look forward to bringing you more exciting news and features in next month's Newsletter.

Best wishes,
--
Scott Willoughby
Four Star Newsletter General, SEOmoz
------------------------
Become a Better SEO.
This email was sent by: SEOmoz
4314 Roosevelt Way NE Seattle, WA, 98105, USA




Copyright © 1994-2007 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
NOTICE: We collect personal information on this site.
To learn more about how we use your information, see our Privacy Policy


4314 Roosevelt Way NE Seattle, WA,...
Add to Address Book | Search the Web

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog :"LAS VEGAS CONVENTION CENTER"

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog



"
SEO moz

photo :"LAS VEGAS CONVENTION CENTER"
randfish
Wikipedia Finally Makes the Right Decision

Posted by randfish on Sun (1/21/07) at 11:34 PM Link Building

It may seem odd coming from someone who practices link building and whose clients require the service, but I'm gald to see that Wikipedia has shifted back to nofollow on all outbound links. What surprises me is that a relatively small-time SEO contest was the catalyst (according to Wikipedia's talk page on the subject).

At Jimbo Wales' directive, all external links within the English language Wikipedia are now coded "nofollow" -- this should help cut spamming immensely once word gets out in the SEO community.

This was mentioned in the discussion Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Globalwarming awareness2007/SEO world championship -- expect a spam onslaught.

As usual, the "SEO" brush is applied as a moniker to mean "those who spam for links." I don't expect this language or reputation to change, but it's always sad to see. What will be interesting to watch is how it really affects Wikipedia's spam problem. From my perspective, there may be slightly less of an incentive for spammers to hit Wikipedia pages in the short term, but no less value to serious marketers seeking to boost traffic and authority by creating relevant Wikipedia links.

I'm just keeping my fingers crossed that Wikipedia doesn't revert back and switch back to live links in the future. Since anyone can add them, Wikipedia is practically the definition of where nofollow should be instituted. Matt Cutts mentioned back in our multiple choice interview that:

In my ideal world, Wikipedia would add nofollow to their untrusted links, but work out ways to allow trusted links to remove the nofollow attribute.

They're halfway to your dream Matt. Here's to hoping they don't go any further :)

*
Do you like this post?

56 Comments (56 New)

1. Add Comment
2. Hide Comments
3. Email me when new comments are posted



*
Joost de Valk (196) Joost de Valk
Sun (1/21/07) at 11:55 PM
They're learning fast... The admin who mailed me that they added nofollow is one of the people trying to learn from the SEO community, and some have even proposed working with the SEO community to get a way to prevent spam which makes everyone happy. Matt's dream might still come true :)
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Joost de Valk Comment Permalink
*
am9905d (59) am9905d
Mon (1/22/07) at 01:09 AM
It will be interesting to see what will happen with the really niche SERPs where a wikipedia link could make a big difference.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to am9905d Comment Permalink
*
AndyBeard (84) AndyBeard
Mon (1/22/07) at 01:26 AM
It wasn't the only alternative and this effectively turns Wikipedia into a black hole of link equity.

It is hard enough to rank against Wikipedia stubs as it is.

I proposed a much easier to implement system in a blog post today that would meet Matts ideal situation.

I honestly hate the idea of more nofollow than less, and how is Google meant to handle duplicate content if it can't count links to reference work?

* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to AndyBeard Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Mon (1/22/07) at 12:44 PM

It wasn't the only alternative and this effectively turns Wikipedia into a black hole of link equity.



Links provide four points of value:

Visibility
Traffic
Anchor text
Internal PageRank

I don't see that Wikipedia has become "a black hole of link euity". Their Internal PageRank will most likely be distributed evenly across all Web sites. That's a good thing.

All people really lose is the anchor text and, frankly, too many SEOs use it as a crutch anyway.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
AndyBeard AndyBeard
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:00 PM
They are also used to determine duplicate content and the origin of ideas.

Do a blogsearch for Wikipedia and references to it being a "black hole" for link equity

None of them are currently linking back to my blog, where the term was first used

The number one listing for digital camera might well change to Wikipedia in the next few days as the number one and two currently used to have a link on the Wikipedia page that was followable.

I wonder how much material was used from those sites as a reference.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to AndyBeard Comment Permalink
*
leadegroot leadegroot
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:27 PM
The 'black hole' effect concerns me - we tell people to link out, because passing PR is not a bad thing, but are we now going to see Wiki move up the rankings because wiki doesn't pass the love to the topic-related sites that it used to?
The number of results wiki dominates already is bad enough - will it get worse? :(

I do wonder if the engines shouldn't introduce some sort of reverse-penalty; if all your outbound links on a page are condomed, then you suffer a ranking penalty.
I wonder if that wouldn't improve the results?
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to leadegroot Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Tue (1/23/07) at 08:40 AM

...but are we now going to see Wiki move up the rankings because wiki doesn't pass the love to the topic-related sites that it used to?



That is highly unlikely.

(Internal) PageRank is not necessarily the deciding factor in search results. It has absolutely no impact on determining relevance, which is how content is first sorted.

And people can pretty easily outrank Wikpiedia articles for a variety of topics. I do it in many verticals.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
AndyBeard AndyBeard
Tue (1/23/07) at 09:04 AM
That flies in the face of linking content to other relevant content.

Maybe internal relevance is less important than external, or given less weighting, but linkage is one way of adding value to duplicate content.

Edit: One additional point, if internal relevance wasn't important, how would a Wikipedia stub outrank sites with 3000 backlinks? (yes that has happened to me) Edited by AndyBeard on Tue (1/23/07) at 09:12 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to AndyBeard Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Tue (1/23/07) at 08:41 AM
Unintentional duplicate.

Matt: When I clicked on the ADD button nothing appeared to happen. Edited by Michael Martinez on Tue (1/23/07) at 08:44 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Tue (1/23/07) at 08:42 AM
Unintentional duplicate. Edited by Michael Martinez on Tue (1/23/07) at 08:44 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
leadegroot (77) leadegroot
Mon (1/22/07) at 02:03 AM
Odd, I am seeing nofollow on some pages, but not others.
Surely they have only one central code source?
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to leadegroot Comment Permalink
*
Joost de Valk Joost de Valk
Mon (1/22/07) at 02:07 AM
It should be on all outbound links... Wikimedia, their software, should be adding it in... Which pages do you see that don't have nofollow?
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Joost de Valk Comment Permalink
*
leadegroot leadegroot
Mon (1/22/07) at 02:02 PM
Hi Joost!

Its there now on the ones I checked yesterday.
I'm thinking it was a caching issue.
Should have thought of that :(
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to leadegroot Comment Permalink
*
Joost de Valk Joost de Valk
Mon (1/22/07) at 11:35 PM
Good, that's what I thought ;) Edited by Joost de Valk on Mon (1/22/07) at 11:36 PM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Joost de Valk Comment Permalink
*
Search Engines WEB (78) Search Engines WEB
Mon (1/22/07) at 04:53 AM
THIS IS A HORRIBLE IDEA !!!!!

NOFOLLOW Is a cowardly way out of accepting responsibility. Only cowards use nofollow !!!

Everyone knows the value of getting a good link - untile a day ago Wikepedia had made #1 on Google & Yahoo for: Search Engine Optimization .....breaking a two year run by a well known SEO.

Now Wikipedia comes up on the top 20 for thousands of competative queries

Even this blog once did a topic about its year-end STATS and showed how my social sites were linking to it.

How would everyone like it, if all those backlinks converted to NOFOLLOW until they recieved a reciprocal link

That will be the trend if this continues (what's in it for me)

Listen to SearchEnginesWeb - do away with the NoFollow ASAP Edited by Search Engines WEB on Mon (1/22/07) at 04:54 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Search Engines WEB Comment Permalink
*
Elena Elena
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:25 AM
NOFOLLOW Is a cowardly way out of accepting responsibility. Only cowards use nofollow !!!

Odd. I've always thought it is an efficient way of well.. not wasting time.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Elena Comment Permalink
*
EGOL (872) EGOL Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 05:55 AM
This is very wise for wikipedia. It increases the ratio of editorially given links in their documents. It also reduces the incentive for linkbuilders who edit wikipedia articles outside of their area of expertise for the purpose of making their links look legit.

This call by wikipedia will decrease spam and preserve article quality.

It does not stop the problem. Some linkbuilders will still grub wikipedia links, but now only for the traffic instead of for the link juice. Edited by EGOL on Mon (1/22/07) at 07:06 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to EGOL Comment Permalink
*
sherwoodseo sherwoodseo
Mon (1/22/07) at 06:44 AM
Agreed. There are thousands of Wikipedia pages that gets 4-figure traffic and up - still making it worth the effort for spammers and honest SEOs alike. Edited by sherwoodseo on Mon (1/22/07) at 06:50 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to sherwoodseo Comment Permalink
*
davidmihm (483) davidmihm Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 06:43 AM
I also think this makes a lot of sense for Wikipedia. Posting links for new sites or those which haven't been crawled in awhile, though, seems like it would still help, just to get the spiders to visit and index the site...

randfish Thu, Dec 07, 2006 at 04:49:38 PM

mbarr - Adam Lasnik & Tim Converse both said on a panel today at SES Chicago that they don't "obey" the no following part of nofollow. Both agreed that a more accurate name woudl actually be "nolinkjuice" - it doesn't give anchor text benefit or link pop benefit. They still get crawled as a discovery method.

* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to davidmihm Comment Permalink
*
GeoffreyF67 GeoffreyF67
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:30 PM
And this, Rand, is exactly why spammers don't really give a damn about nofollow. After all, all they really want is for their pages to be found especially if they're throwing stuff against the wall to see what sticks!

G-Man
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to GeoffreyF67 Comment Permalink
*
AndrewRedfern (1) AndrewRedfern
Mon (1/22/07) at 06:43 AM
Given that Wikipedia ranks for almost all terms well - the traffic from a well placed link is substantial enough without the "link love"; so we cant really complain if they do change it.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to AndrewRedfern Comment Permalink
*
Cygnus (90) Cygnus
Mon (1/22/07) at 06:51 AM
I suppose that since I never really trusted Wikipedia, that this just makes things rather reciprocal. :)

It was mentioned elsewhere, but the value in spamming Wikis aren't just for the link equity, but for the pure traffic. If a wiki is ranking for a highly competitive term, then it makes sense to have a link from that page, "no follow" or not. Thus, I don't expect this to really solve Wiki's problems; it is a community and management issue.

Cygnus
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Cygnus Comment Permalink
*
3PointRoss (2) 3PointRoss
Mon (1/22/07) at 07:00 AM
I am somewhat conflicted about the whole idea. In terms of battling spam it will likely have a positive effect (however I doubt that it is going to FIX it.) However it does seem to go against the idea that a link from a high trusted site is supposed to be a vote, and the legit links on wiki should be getting a vote.

I may be biased though, I have a few sites that are linked from Wikipedia (legit).
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to 3PointRoss Comment Permalink
*
Jeremy Luebke (168) Jeremy Luebke
Mon (1/22/07) at 07:28 AM
Wiki links are no better than guestbook links in many ways therefore I applaud the move and hope it sticks.

In the end, I predict it will be easier for me to get some links to stick now. I'm more interested in being an authority for a subject than link juice anyways.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Jeremy Luebke Comment Permalink
*
Peter T Davis (7) Peter T Davis
Mon (1/22/07) at 07:34 AM
Well, not everyone thinks that SEOs are a bunch of link spammers. Some people think that SEOs are people who write "nonsense designed to do nothing but attract a Digg."
see....
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/...
Maybe link baiter will replace link spammer as the new SEO.

* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Peter T Davis Comment Permalink
*
oddcomments (5) oddcomments
Mon (1/22/07) at 07:51 AM
It may no longer pass PageRank ...but I have a feeling the engines will still rely on Wikipedia for determining relevancy. It is just too good of a resource.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to oddcomments Comment Permalink
*
EGOL EGOL
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:04 AM
lol... that would be really sneaky... but I think that it is a good idea.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to EGOL Comment Permalink
*
Joost de Valk Joost de Valk
Mon (1/22/07) at 11:38 PM
The biggest problems with SE's and WikiPedia is that SE's don't seem to have found a way yet to classify "stubs" (WikiPedia term for articles that have been determined to be incorrect or incomplete), as they still rank these stubs very highly...

Problem is that spamming these stubs is easy too, since admins aren't watching those that closely (oops, did I say that ;) )
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Joost de Valk Comment Permalink
*
leadegroot leadegroot
Tue (1/23/07) at 01:14 AM
But do remember that Wikipedia could solve that - a page that is identified as a stub could have a meta robots noindex, nofollow put on it!
Thats an easy one - but will they make the effort?
(and if you can point me to where to make the suggestion I will happily make it)
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to leadegroot Comment Permalink
*
Blackbeard (35) Blackbeard
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:22 AM
This will be about as effective at stopping Wikipedia spam as it was for stopping blog spam. People thought nofollow would put a dent in blog spam and if anything it had the reverse effect. This doesn't really solve the problem, only the symptom. The problem is that links are a major part of how search engines rank pages, and there is a large financial incentive to ranking high. Until search engines learn to rank by variables other than links, the large(high trust) websites that rely on user-generated content are going to be extremely vulnerable to link spam. To think otherwise is foolish.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Blackbeard Comment Permalink
*
Selkirk (5) Selkirk
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:30 AM
nofollow won't prevent WikiPedia spam any more than it has prevented blog spam. nofollow improves the quality of the SERPS, not the quality of the sites that use it.

If anything, the WikiPedia pages may rank

Editorializing doesn't seem to scale well. WikiPedia is the new DMOZ.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Selkirk Comment Permalink
*
jjspirko (8) jjspirko
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:36 AM
I think this means nothing.

1. SEs seem to be ignoring the command.

2. Adding it to blogs (the original reason) has done NOT ONE THING to cut down on comment spam.

Nofollow may be fast becoming the most useless command on the net,

* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to jjspirko Comment Permalink
*
ROIGuy (20) ROIGuy
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:37 AM
Announcing this to the SEO community may put a small dent in Wikipedia link spam. SEOs that have been paying attention may have realized that Google wasn't passing PR from Wikipedia for some time.

The real problem is that Wikipedia ranks too high for many, many terms because it is considered an "authority" site and it passes INTERNAL PR.

The real solution is for the engines to treat Wikipedia sections as independent sites and force them to rank based on the external links pointing in to them. The Wikipedia entry for SEO, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_engine_op... has less than 5,000 external links (mostly complaining about it ranking higher than it should, I imagine).

Take the same content, same back links, etc. and put it up at a 5 year old domain that wasn't part of Wikipedia and I doubt it would have a PR of 7 or rank in the top 10. Edited by ROIGuy on Mon (1/22/07) at 09:38 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to ROIGuy Comment Permalink
*
Aaron Pratt Aaron Pratt
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:43 AM
ROIGuy - I agree with the first two paragraphs of your comment. :)
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Aaron Pratt Comment Permalink
*
ROIGuy ROIGuy
Mon (1/22/07) at 03:15 PM
Aaron:

Thanks for the endorsement, but why don't you agree with my third or fourth paragraph :-).
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to ROIGuy Comment Permalink
*
EGOL (872) EGOL Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:10 AM

The real problem is that Wikipedia ranks too high for many, many terms because it is considered an "authority" site and it passes INTERNAL PR.



I agree, I agree, I agree. I see wikipedia STUB pages and articles with trivial content rank higher in the Google SERPs than far superior content which is optimized and has a nice number of links. I think that Google needs to crank down the value of internal link juice or at least look at content depth.

I would like to see wikipedia place nofollow tags to all of their STUB pages.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to EGOL Comment Permalink
*
am9905d am9905d
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:26 AM
I really doubt that will happen especially when they actually request people to link to stubs
example
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to am9905d Comment Permalink
*
GeoffreyF67 GeoffreyF67
Mon (1/22/07) at 02:26 PM
No. No. And No.

Stub pages should be marked as NOINDEX until they are no longer a stub.

G-Man
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to GeoffreyF67 Comment Permalink
*
stokelake (13) stokelake
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:17 AM
Rand, i assume this means that your page strength tool needs to be amended, i.e. take out the wikipedia links section. Edited by stokelake on Mon (1/22/07) at 10:18 AM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to stokelake Comment Permalink
*
Aaron Pratt (178) Aaron Pratt
Mon (1/22/07) at 10:18 AM
Wikipedia is the Amazon.com of content in Google.

Remember guys that Wiki's rankings will not change, it just will now be allowed to pass HUGE PR favor to it's sponsors.

;-0
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Aaron Pratt Comment Permalink
*
SEO Practices (91) SEO Practices Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 11:43 AM
leadegroot said:
"Odd, I am seeing nofollow on some pages, but not others. Surely they have only one central code source?"

I've noticed the same thing too, is this going to be applied to all links or just for new links?


* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to SEO Practices Comment Permalink
*
jjspirko (8) jjspirko
Mon (1/22/07) at 12:41 PM
Seriously try this,

Make a page about some made up term something like

hyperactivemoroniclinkprotection for an example.

Plant it deep with no internal links from the domain you put it on.

Now go to one of your other domains something with high authority. Make and anchor link for

hyperactivemoroniclinkprotection (or what ever term you choose) make it the only link you ever give the page.

Wait say 2-3 weeks, search for the term.

You will know the truth about and SE indexing.

Mark Barrera at MasterLink reported on this a while ago http://dallas-seo.blogspot.com/2006/11/nofoll...

I did too but won't spam Rands blog with my own self serving link but let me say I posted on it more then a full YEAR ago. Like I have said once here already, the command has been rendered all but useless. Seeing is believing try it yourself,

Jack Spirko
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to jjspirko Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Mon (1/22/07) at 12:52 PM

Mark Barrera at MasterLink reported on this a while ago ...



His test was invalid.

Frankly, many of the comments posted here are very disappointing, as they underscore just how much ignorance continues to flow through the SEO community regarding these matters.

This ain't rocket science.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 2 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
randfish randfish
Mon (1/22/07) at 01:11 PM
Michael - it's my opinion that your criticism, without suitable backup evidence and a point of your own does more of a disservice than the misinformation. Simply saying that one disagrees and it should be obvious that someone else is wrong is no help at all. It's one of the patterns I dislike most.

On this specific issue, I think I even agree with you - that nofollow isn't always interpreted correctly by folks, but the style and animosity seem perplexing from someone who has the ability to provide salient information. Edited by randfish on Mon (1/22/07) at 01:12 PM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 3 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to randfish Comment Permalink
*
AndyBeard AndyBeard
Mon (1/22/07) at 09:23 PM
Here is one additional test I like to refer to because it has nice pictures and is easy for people to understand.

http://www.macalua.com/2006/11/03/nofollow-ya...
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to AndyBeard Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Tue (1/23/07) at 07:41 PM

...it's my opinion that your criticism, without suitable backup evidence and a point of your own does more of a disservice than the misinformation....



I could say it's a disservice for you to endorse an obviously flawed test, Rand. There are several problems with his test, the first of which is that he wrongly attributed a promise to Google that they never made (he quoted a Searchenginewatch post rather than Google's original post as written by Matt Cutts, which differed from what was shared on SEW).

This is so typical of SEO community "tests" and analysis, and the best service you and I can provide is to challenge all such tests and insist that people hold themselves to higher standards.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
jjspirko jjspirko
Tue (1/23/07) at 07:52 PM
Mike,

You need a pill man. You can disagree with out being nasty. The reality is you can criticize the test but can you explain the results. Or do you just want to toss them on semantics.

Jack
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to jjspirko Comment Permalink
*
Michael Martinez Michael Martinez
Tue (1/23/07) at 08:32 PM

You need a pill man. You can disagree with out being nasty.



You and I clearly have different ideas of what constitutes "being nasty".
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 3 thumbs down
* Reply to Michael Martinez Comment Permalink
*
CarstenC (102) CarstenC Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 03:51 PM
>In my ideal world, Wikipedia would add nofollow to their untrusted links, but work out ways to allow trusted links to remove the nofollow attribute.

> They're halfway to your dream Matt. Here's to hoping they don't go any further :)

C'mon the last part can Google do themselves, because that is what they already used to do in the past. I don't have to be a Google engineer to determine trustworthy links at wikipedia. Three Hints.

1. ARTICLE MAIN SPACE ONLY
2. LINK AGE
3. INTERNAL WIKIPEDIA LINKING (especially CATEGORIES)

I can spell it out if needed.. ooh.. I already did. Well, Invoice is in the mail .. What is the Street Number again in Mountain View? ;)



* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to CarstenC Comment Permalink
*
SearchStudent (163) SearchStudent Premium Member
Mon (1/22/07) at 08:57 PM
If I was wikipedia, I would have done it a long time ago. And I'm a link slut.

Even link sluts need condoms when putting out so much. Don't wanna end up with a nasty LTD (Link Transmitted Disease).

Many SEOs get mad about engines and sites taking away their low hanging fruit but let's face it people, part of being an SEO is to evolve and see these things coming. If we didn't evolve, we'd all still be loving crappy link exchanges and FFAs.

So in short (for you complainers) Don't get mad, get better at being an SEO already.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to SearchStudent Comment Permalink
*
jjspirko (8) jjspirko
Tue (1/23/07) at 12:21 PM
OK I went on record here that rel=nofollow was useless and pointless. That it did not slow spam and people that contribute real comments are worthy of a full link anyway.

Someone called me on it (you know who you are) and asked why I use them on my blog, this was the result.

Killing the No Follow at Comtech News

No more nofollow on ComTech News.

So if nothing else I put my money where my mouth is,

Jack Spirko Edited by jjspirko on Tue (1/23/07) at 12:24 PM
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to jjspirko Comment Permalink
*
seoteam (28) seoteam
Wed (1/24/07) at 09:28 AM
This will certainly cut down on the spam but it was once a great resource for SEO.

PS wiki search sucks!!!
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to seoteam Comment Permalink
*
Tony Adam (8) Tony Adam
Wed (1/24/07) at 12:34 PM
Obviously a much needed move by Wikipedia. As everyone mentioned it will definitely cut down on spam. It is to bad though that the WHOLE "SEO" community was mentioned and didn't seperate the spammers...atleast it looked that way in my eyes.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Tony Adam Comment Permalink
*
Michal W (7) Michal W
Thu (1/25/07) at 08:01 AM
In my opinion having links pointing to your site on Wikipedia is still profitable since the Wikipedia databases are not only used on wikipedia.org.

Moreover I don't believe that search engines do not consider links labeled with "nofollow". If this trend continues, the value of "nofollow"-links for search engines might become almost the same as of normal links.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Michal W Comment Permalink
*
bogdan lebu (143) bogdan lebu
Wed (3/28/07) at 03:24 PM
it's true that the spam level will be reduced... but there are still some valuable pages on wikipedia, which deserve a "follow" link...
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to bogdan lebu Comment Permalink
*
Chris Rothwell (148) Chris Rothwell
Wed (3/28/07) at 03:31 PM
I think in the forseeable future that Matt's dream will come true. Hopefully it will cut the spam down even more and improve the quality of wikipedia.
* Thumbs Down Thumbs Up 1 thumbs up, 0 thumbs down
* Reply to Chris Rothwell Comment Permalink
* Add Comment

Neighboring Posts

* They're Blogging, and It's Worthy of Attention
* Best Practices for Title Tags

Partnered with Superb Internet Partnered with ExactTarget

* Home
* Blog
* Articles
* Tools
* YOUmoz
* Premium Content
* About
* Our Services
* Our Clients
* Contact
* Fun Stuff

0 SEOmoz Members Currently Online

* Page Strength SEO Tool - SEOmoz.org
* valid css
* valid xhtml
* CakePHP : Rapid Development Framework

All Content and Intellectual Property is under Copyright Protection | SEOmoz ©1996-2007
"

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog :Şi totuşi P L D -CONSTANTA are un VICIU ASCUNS el se numeşte COLABORAREA cu P D -CONSTANTA

Yahoo! 360° - Sin D's Blog


collage:
Şi totuşi P L D -CONSTANTA are un VICIU ASCUNS el se numeşte COLABORAREA cu P D -CONSTANTA -Iustian n-are cojoness el duce la Constanta politica SRUŢULUI noi aici mai avem ceva nisip încă...

Tags: pld-cta/\dumithttp://www.blogger.com/img/gl.photo.gif
Adăugaţi imaginerusin | Edit Tags