Well, lets backtrack. The original question was, how can we exclude wikipedia clones from the search. my idea was to create a search engine that includes only refs from wikipedia in it. then the idea was to make our own engine instead of only using google. lets agree that we need first a list of references and we can talk about the details of the searching later. thanks, mike
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:02 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > In a message dated 12/10/2010 1:31:20 PM Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected] writes: > > > If we prefer pages that can be cached and translated, and mark the > others that cannot, then by natural selection we will in long term > replaces the pages that are not allowed to be cached with ones that > can be. > > My suggestion is for a wikipedia project, something to be supported > and run on the toolserver or similar. > > > I think if you were to propose that we should "prefer" pages that "can be > cached and translated" you'd get a firestorm of opposition. > The majority of our refs, imho, are still under copyright. This is because > the majority of our refs are either web pages created by various authors who > do not specify a free license (and therefore under U.S. law automatically > enjoy copyright protection). Or they are refs to works which are relatively > current, and are cited, for example in Google Books Preview mode, or at > Amazon look-inside pages. > > I still cannot see any reason why we would want to cache anything like > this. You haven't addressed what benefit it gives us, to cache refs. > My last question here is not about whether we can or how, but how does it > help the project? > > How? > > W > -- James Michael DuPont Member of Free Libre Open Source Software Kosova and Albania flossk.org flossal.org _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
