True. But Wookieepedia has a headstart on you, name recognition and a userpage. Besides, Rebels is not a selfcontained series. It features numerous events and characters that are part of a larger universe.
Exactly, but he's clearly too lazy to write his own content. And when I told him that his actions were pulling our SEO down, he started removing the template I put up for crediting us.
PS: I hammered his SEO to virtually nil by reporting all the spam pages on his wiki. There's pages called "Chapter <###>" with loads of trashy links to illegal manga sites and zero text whatsoever. But I'm still sensing a drain on our SEO so I may as well continue.
Oh yeah. I fixed that manually thanks to Google Webmaster's spam report. However, his wiki was ranking #5 for the live-action adaptation of the manga a good month back and it took a huge drain on our SEO because he plaigarised the whole page complete with the inline table and gallery code. But as I said, the webspam team found the 25 pages I reported to be in violation of their Webmaster Guidelines and his wiki took a hike =D
But I'm 99% sure that he was stalking my contributions page and copying directly about 2 months back - which I am so angry about and how the Wikia staff member just blanked that. When I copped him about a month ago, he took it lowkey and started waiting a few days before he went and started deleting any existing attribution to our wiki. I don't know how this guy is given safe harbour or a blind eye by Wikia but frankly, I've been pretty miffed about it and its taking a lot of effort to stay cool in the message I'm writing.
Wow. Plain wow. Its like some users have never worked for content in their lives. If Wikia did something about their scrapers inside and outside, maybe the domain would actually rank nearer to Wikipedia (or above for the term <insert-subject-here> "wiki" every time).
If another user wants to commit SEO hara-kiri, that's fine by me. But if you have seen the conversations we have had on their wiki (which I am not opening and will not - its too painful), he clearly knows he's dragging us down with him seeing as our wiki is a young one.
Well played, Wikia. I think someone in some office behind some desk is genuinely under the belief that this situation is a joke. But frankly, I fail to see the punchline.
I wouldn't get my hopes up. Feedback (to any company, not just Wikia) is rarely addressed with specific answers (more like "we'll look into it"). And staff doesn't always reply to these kind of blogs (though sometimes, they do).
Because I personally don't find replying to blog post a easy way to go about it (like there's no notification when you are directly being replied), so I figured I would just talk to you on your wall separately.
There's also the fact that what I'm adding to feels branching off of the actual topic of the blog post. Anyways, I guess I need to start by saying, perhaps I am indeed extremely lucky, that it seems like every time I sent in a request or inquiry about something, I do always eventually get my answer, which is why I have a relatively high opinion about the Staffs and I wouldn't tell anyone to not be optimistic. =]
For example; I had a big issue with the editors for templates suddenly all became the same as ones for .js or .css, I asked about it here; from the response I got (on the same page), I actually honestly didn't think the editor would be reverted back any time soon, but I appreciate that at least I voiced my opinion and they heard it; and what do you know? Although it again came as a surprise to suddenly have to pick "types" for templates, I did essentially got what I wanted, the old editor back.
So yeah, I guess what I'm trying to say is, I know sometimes it's frustrating (I fully admit I still feel that way about certain aspect), but it really doesn't hurt to have a little more faith in the Staffs. :3 That's just me. Hope I didn't offend you too much by saying all this.
Every time I send in something, I get a reply too - that isn't the issue. And I've met several staffers in person. Twice. I liked all of them.
This wasn't a dig at Wikia, but about people's expectations of feedback in general. Sometimes, things may seem like a very good idea to you (I've had a couple), you send it in, and you get a generic reply, and then nothing. And that's good feedback, not the "I don't like it, change it back" type. It might leave people deflated if they can't see what's being done about it, but that's just how it works. They can't commit to anything.
Oh yeah, I didn't think you were being particularly mean or unfair with your statement at all; in fact I think you were being very realistic and it's absolutely true that there's a good possibility that what you said may be the case. (Sorry if that part wasn't clear lol) Just that somehow I guess I got more of an impression to "prepare for the worst", instead of the "let's think about the bright side", which was why I couldn't help but wanting to share the positive part of my experience. Honestly I'm not sure what came over me to HAVE TO write to you about it lol. Sorry if this whole convo seems a bit silly. Bahaha xP Thanks for being patient with me and the reply!!
It's a nice idea, but BTN has a huge head start on you.
My advice would be, go to your local library and look in the onomastics section (usually part of dictionaries etc.) There have to be some books - even if it's "baby names" guides. Look at them and use their content. The key is, PARAPHRASE. Don't copy directly. But at all times, give proper sources.
Well, all of what you're trying to do is just a way to not do the job yourself, so if you do that, you can't be a very useful resource, since everyone can just go on Wikipedia for the same content, or on behindthename.com directly.
But, what is the point of making an encyclopediæ if it's to copy others? I'm not saying that you can't make a wiki, but what you're doing can get you in some pretty bad trouble. And Staff allows you to make a wiki, but not copyright infringement.
Because I'm really interested in creating lists with hundreds of names. What could be good for me?
But what can happen? Nothing will happen if I copy only "some" text from Wikipedia. Staff won't close my wiki only for a little text from wikipedia. And if Wikipedia says that copying some text is allowed, then wikipedia won't send Staff messages only for that text. I'm sure. Why was Wikia created? Staff wanted to try to copy MediaWiki from Wikipedia. :P
Wikia was created by the founder of Wikipedia, and it was supposed to be a repertory of wikis. So, bad example. SEO is what makes your website apparent on Google, Bing, Yahoo, etc. If you copy from others, it will be inexistent.
Wikipedia allows to copy text indeed, under the CC-BY-SA license, which means you have to credit them, or it's copyright infringement. So no, there's no “copying if you want to copy,” there are very important regulations to be respected. Which is why you're better off with your own content. Here's an allegory. You can't stab someone and defend yourself with “I only stabbed him a little bit.”
A name is a word or term utilized for identification. Names can identify a class or category of things, or a single thing, either uniquely, or within a given context. A personal name identifies, not compulsorily uniquely, a categorical individual human. The designation of a concrete entity is sometimes called a felicitous name (albeit that term has a philosophical meaning additionally) and is, when consisting of only one word, a congruous entity. Other entities are sometimes called "mundane denominations" or (obsolete) "general denominations". A designation can be given to a person, place, or thing; for example, parents can give their child a denomination or scientist can give an element a designation.
A name is a word or term used for identification. Names can identify a class or category of things, or a single thing, either uniquely, or within a given context. A personal name identifies, not necessarily uniquely, a specific individual human. The name of a specific entity is sometimes called a proper name (although that term has a philosophical meaning also) and is, when consisting of only one word, a proper noun. Other nouns are sometimes called "common names" or (obsolete) "general names". A name can be given to a person, place, or thing; for example, parents can give their child a name or scientist can give an element a name.
Is that OK what I did? I also used my text for the homepage.
A name is a word utilized for ID. Names can distinguish a class or classification of things, or a solitary thing, either remarkably, or inside of a given connection. An individual name distinguishes, not as a matter of course extraordinarily, a particular individual human. The name of a particular element is once in a while called an appropriate name (despite the fact that that term has a philosophical significance likewise) and is, when comprising of stand out word, a formal person, place or thing. Different things are once in a while called "normal names" or (outdated) "general names". A name can be given to a man, place, or thing; for instance, folks can give their kid a name or researcher can give a component a name.
OOh boy. Sorry, rewriting is not changing everyu other word in any sentence - especially since you use words that noone else uses. And most of the times don't even fit.
Rewriting text isn't supposed to happen at sentence level. It's at paragraph level, or even better, article level. I know because I totally did this for a living once. For three months, but still.
First, identify the as many of the Five Ws as applicable. Once you've narrowed that down, you've got to mold it into a draft. Once you've got a draft, go over it and remove everything that isn't necessary - either to improve readability or to weed out parts that aren't relevant to your purpose. Seriously, rewriting that bit of text there can be done in two or three lines.
What should I do know? I like to use the text from Wikipedia from now. That are only 2 pages with some text from Wikipedia. The "Name" and "Anglo-Saxon" pages are the only ones, I won't add more. Look I found a page on Wii Sports Wiki that has copied text from Wikipedia: http://wiisports.wikia.com/wiki/Wii_Sports
If that's allowed then I can also do it on at least 2 pages
The rest I'll do, OK? I want to finish this talking now.
Phillip, we're trying to make you understand that this is copyright infringement. It's a severe issue, a violation of the law, in more concise words. Again, as Tupka explains it, this is still derivative text, except that you use words that make no sense with the rest of the definition.
Well, you can copy from Wikipedia, as long as you credit them. That's okay. But it's better for your Search Engine Optimalization (SEO) if you have unique content. And synonym-swapping usually doesn't get picked up by search engines... and it's also very unpleasant to read.
If you're not interested in SEO, chances are noone's going to find you, noone's going to help you, and you're going to have to do all the work yourself.
Just some notes on your five pages large wiki:
I know you're not native or near-native, but "You also find very old names used for 100 years ago!" isn't English. Also, in terms of human history, 100 years isn't a very long time ago. Most of the names used then are still in used now.
If you just want a list of names, that's fine. But if you want to include meanings as well, you should at least mention it on your main page. No mention of "etymology", "meaning", or anything else that it's supposed to be an onomastic endeavor. That's necessary for SEO.
Also, that line I cited in the first point, as well as the "Cooper" article... they look unprofessional.
As for Anglo-Saxon - think of what I mentioned above about removing unnecessary information. Not just that... it's a huge pile of text with no paragraphs or sections. Even if you don't care about being found, you've got to care about being READ. That haphazard heap of words is not a pleasant read.
In addition to work, you've also have to have knowledge. Basic knowledge of onomastical terms and historical linguistics. Who the Anglo-Saxons were isn't really relevant to the onomastical side of things. Just that Old English, the language of the Anglo-Saxons, is in the Germanic language family. It's an Ingvaeonic language, if you want to be more precise. Only 2,5 of those still in use.
You can further categorize names by origin; for example, Cooper can go in a category for surnames used as first names, as well as names based on professions.
The key to building a big database is getting your work structured. For example, make a list of all the names starting with A you know, same for B, etc. In Excel, Access, or whatever program replaced them (I'm old). Alphabetize them, and then make articles on them. You can always expand the list later, it just gives you some meat at the start.
Determine what non-name articles you need (along the lines of Anglo-Saxon), and what priority they have.
Tupka is distributing the truth like a minigun distributes freedom; you'll take more time doing hundreds of unnecessary pages all by yourself so no one will help you, rather than making a couple of big, well-documented pages that will have everyone love, and help around your wiki.
If it's not at least for your wiki, at least take it like a professional experience. You can't be picky when you're looking for a job, and welfare doesn't work as good as it used to do.
Also I know it's been a few days I am on it but two accounts known as Vulture Droid and DSD1 Dwarf Spider Droid constantly inserts false information and vandalized pages such as adding that Commander Cody killed Grievous and Grievous is hero.