•Interview: Wikipedia's founder on Wikia Green
SmartPlanet.com, UK -2 minutes ago
Wikipedia's founder has launched a community for all things green. Like Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales' new Wikia Green can be edited by anyone, but it's built to ...[/size][/font]

View the article

There's some classic stuff from Jimbo in this one, folks.



In one response Jimbo sounds ignorant (of traffic stats of the website on which he serves as a Board member), insulting of the volunteers ("we don't even track those kinds of numbers" sure might piss off a few workers who took the time to track it hourly), and all-too-glad to name drop (Al Gore, Jimbo? Are you really playing the Al Gore card?)



Well, if Wikia can do anything, we know it's clarify information.



+++ *** +++ ***

Something I found interesting about the new Green Wikia is that (for example) this page about How to reduce your carbon footprint takes content ("a significant benefit for those who aren't in shape") verbatim from the site WikiHow. Now, WikiHow releases their content under a Creative Commons license that says "You must not use the content for commercial purposes."

Do you think that Wikia will say that they goofed in stealing the content, or will they say that they intend for Green Wikia to be a not-for-profit arm of Wikia, Inc., or will they say that this is just "typeset recycling" (a new form of conservation)?

I'll try to find out.

Greg

Hmm... Maybe nevermind. It might just be a part of Green Wikia's mission:

Yeah, it's rife with one copyright violation after another after another.

Whoops, I couldn't actually link to my edit on that last one (copyright, The Skyscraper Museum and curator Carol Willis), because before I could click "Save", I was struck with this:



Looks like Wikia is EXACTLY like Wikipedia. Point out too many problems with the misappropriation of other people's copyrighted labor, and that will earn you a block-a-roo.

Greg

As someone who disagrees with the majority of the green agenda (as do the majority of the UK population, if the comments I've heard while canvassing for elections are widespread), I'm tempted to join to ensure it remains NPOV!

Just make sure you swipe a lot of copyrighted material, verbatim, without attribution. That appears to be the way one "fits in" over there.

MollyH seems to be oblivious to the problem. She looks a bit like Rachel Marsden. I wonder if Jimbo's taken a liking to her, and that's the real reason he's promoting this particular Wikia sub-site so heavily?

Greg

I'm amazed this hasn't happened before, given the political slant of Wikipedia (namely the slant that doesn't like the thought of individuals making money).

I'd suggest the liberal-leanings and green desires go hand-in-hand with abolishing copyright altogether, so the amount of infringement that seems to be going on at Green is no real surprise.

Might be worth taking a look around the rest of the Wikia Empire - I'd bet the sites nowhere near Wikipedia on the Google rankings don't bother with something as capitalistic as copyright at all!

You'll see plenty of it, and also just some sloppy stuff.

For example, on the Finance Wikia (you'd think a bastion of conservative, copyright-loving old schoolers), you find a page that is an exact copy of something published on the Interinvest site, authored by Dr. Hans Black & Malcolm Thomas. The Wikia user who uploaded it (without attribution to Interinvest or Black or Thomas) goes by the name of "Interinvest". So, that could be some naive employee from Interinvest who doesn't respect their own copyright or attribution concerns, or it's just some joker who figured he'd name his account after the one site he was going to plagiarize. Seems to be the former. Seriously, why would you post an essay to Wikia without so much as one link or reference to your "home" source page? Stupid. I guess stupid people contribute to Wikia.

Finance Wikia is just a wasteland, though.

A more popular and active sub-site would be something like Cyber Nations, which I would venture a guess is 99% comprised of unique and original content. But considering the content, I don't think I would ever want to meet in person the loonies who are vomiting up this kind of information.

So, in sum after my assessments over the months of Wikia, you have three types of wikias:

1. Popular, fancruft sites that are huge, edited often, and 99% original content.

2. Much less popular, serious topic sites that are about 40%-80% culled from Wikipedia, with the remainder split between original content and copyright violations from proprietary sources.

3. Micro-small sites that never garnered more than a handful of editors and maybe 3 dozen articles.

Wikia is such an utter mess, if you actually take the 20 minutes or so to explore its far reaches.

Something hilarious just popped into my e-mail inbox:



Ooh, and the gal who banned me is Angie Shelton, another swell looker.

These ladies must know I'm so hot and magnetic, they have to ban me from Green Wikia, just to keep global warming at bay!

Could be she's working directly under him.

Yeah right, next thing you know they'll be trying to tell us Sarah Palin in an enviral-mentalist.

You are getting sleepy … very very sleepy …

Jon

Smile, folks! we're on Valleywag!

<Hi Owen!>

Oh, goodness gracious. I've started another thread that's going to get Wikipedia Review more visitors. Poetlister and Guy and Yehudi are going to be so disappointed with my hucksterism.

No wonder Jimbo banned you on his "GreenWiki"...You are longer invited to the "Emerald City", Greg.

I guess that you're just not a friend of Dorothy's, Greg...

Hey, knock it off, some of my best friends are Munchkins:

• Boq
• Edvard Munchkin

It's not their fault they're living in a Reign Of Terror (ROT) Behind The Green Door, er Curtain.



Jon

It looks like the rats are scurrying into the corners, now that the copyright-holding cats have been notified.

The Skyscraper Museum didn't sound pleased that significant parts of their copyrighted "Green Glossary" have been lifted into Wikia without any attribution whatsoever.

So far, though, no apology to me, and no warning to those Users who were responsible for the illicit appropriation.

Greg

I liked the bit about wondering if pond scum was green too on Valley Wag....

Looks like User:Multimoog was probably on the receiving end of a "personal note" from Jimbo or maybe Angela, asking if he might "please help clean up" some of the copyrighted content on Green Wikia.

He's gotten through his A-B-C's, and even the D-E-F's, it looks like at this time.

It's odd. I guess if an outsider calls attention to copyright problems, that's a threat to the cult. But if an insider quietly shuffles along and sweeps away content, that's tolerable. Notice how nobody's halting him -- I mean, I thought page blankings in the Wiki(a)World are considered acts of vandalism?! I know I would have been banned if I tried to do that!

They're pitiful.

Looks like they have another, Wikipedia Review-like problem, too -- blatant advertising, followed by timid sheep who feel like they should ask before deleting it.

Clearly, Jimbo's press tour for Green Wikia is bringing a mixed bag of attention back to his site.



Free enterprise, at its best!