| Bah, what would I possibly need with a scraped definition that 1) Hasn't been chunked into 20 pieces of varying grammatical structure which are automatically matched to corresponding questions 2) Hasn't been subsequently pasted over a slideshow of completely irrelevant stock photos in bold, white font 3) Isn't accompanied by a grid of ~30 vaguely related questions helpfully linked to similar pages and tastefully decorated with more irrelevant stock photos 4) Only occupies ~1.5 rather than 3 or 4 of the front page search results 5) Contains only closely related textual ads rather than a melange of casino, fast food, and online college banners 6) Has fewer than 25 trustworthy stock faces smiling back at me from any given scroll position If this is the best google can do then I don't think wiki.answers.com has anything to fear. ------------ Seriously, how the hell does wiki.answers.com manage to pollute half of the searches I make with their algorithmically generated garbage (multiple times, at that)?! What kind of SEO catapulted them to the top despite 0 viewer retention and what surely must be about 0 reputable backlinks? How haven't they been sent to the 1000th page with manual penalties already? They show up before wikipedia itself, for crying out loud! Google, if you aren't going to let users maintain a manual blacklist, you need to be on top of this kind of thing. It's seriously degrading my search experience and I suspect I'm not alone. This kind of inattention is the type of thing that can push even the most inattentive users to change default search engines. |