The IT Skeptic - Comments for "IT Skeptic bumped off Wikipedia"

Adwords

skeptic — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 03:44:28 +0000

You mean the banner across the middle of the content? I don't much like the aesthetics either but it is the ONLY significant source of revenue on the site (but still only just covers the hosting costs)

The value of Adwords

Craig Brown — Mon, 04 Feb 2008 00:28:26 +0000

I think your adwords programme doesn't degrade the quality of the content but does negatively impact on the design and presentation, and thus the delivery of the message.

I am curious as to whether you get sufficient revenue from it to warrant having it here?

(By the way I have just discoverred this site and love it. Thanks.)

Do Google ads undermine the credibility of this site?

skeptic — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 10:03:52 +0000

Time to close off the poll on "Do Google ads undermine the credibility of this site?". I think the results are clear enough for me. A fifth of readers don't like them (or less: objectors are more likely to vote). They are staying.

Yes

21% (9 votes)

45% (19 votes)

Don't care

19% (8 votes)

What Google ads?

14% (6 votes)

Total votes: 42

I agree in principle

skeptic — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 22:04:00 +0000

I agree in principle: an encyclopedia is not a forum. However in fact there is a grey area. There is no need of opinion around most things, but there is a need around ideas that are still maturing and are undecided. If there is debate in the comunity over what is or isn't fact then Wikepedia needs to reflect that. So there is a section on criticism of ITIL, the article cites a newspaper column by Dean Meyer that is pure opinion but is retained because being published by CIO mag apparently gives it credibility, and I can point you to blogs cited elsewhere on Wikipedia where strong debate exists.
So I wish this issue were black and white but I think it isn't.

Thankyou for commenting, and welcome!

No, blog's really don't

Jayne — Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:38:41 +0000

No, blog's really don't belong there. Wikipedia is fact, not opinion.

I do happen to share most of your opinions in fact, but that doesn't mean that they should be represented on the wiki. If the policy was any different, it would disintegrate into one long message board type mess.

As you state yourself, wiki gives a "description of ITIL". Your opinion, and my opinion, are not descriptions of ITIL. They are opinions of ITIL.