PDA

View Full Version : WIkipedia should let people adopt articles



Lostincyberspace
July 4th, 2008, 03:59 AM
Wikipedia could make quite a bit of money by letting people adopt articles. Does any one have any ideas about this, is this a good idea or a bad one.

It wold also alleviate allot of their problems with money have it correspond to the length of the article maybe.

Or be an auction type of sale so who ever is the highest bidder currently has adopted the article all proceeds go to wikipedia and when you loose the article to some one else, half the money they paid goes to wikipedia an half back to you, so you don't lose allot of money.

Silpheed2K
July 4th, 2008, 04:34 AM
Wikipedia is highly inaccurate so I doubt adopting articles from it would be good for the educational system... I'd trust Britannica more for reliable information.

Also, what's the reason behind this whole adopt concept? what does it accomplish?

Lostincyberspace
July 4th, 2008, 04:53 AM
IT is kind of like adopting roads in the united states. it is just to help with the upkeep of the services for the roads it is clearing trash for wikipedia it is giving money. And that is all it would do not give them any special powers just a thing that says that it is adopted by so and so.

geni
July 14th, 2008, 03:14 PM
Microsoft article gets adopted by microsoft as does the linux article. See the problem?

Nano Geek
July 14th, 2008, 03:26 PM
Microsoft article gets adopted by microsoft as does the linux article. See the problem?I don't think he means that only the adopter could edit it. I thought that he was saying that people would help pay the cost for Wikipedia on certain articles.

NovaAesa
July 14th, 2008, 03:40 PM
Sounds like a reasonable idea to me (if asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33 is correct that is).

fatality_uk
July 14th, 2008, 03:45 PM
Can I adopt the article on pornography please? (As long as I am allowed to sell links on MY adopted page)

the yawner
July 14th, 2008, 04:05 PM
What incentives would there be?

fatality_uk
July 14th, 2008, 04:27 PM
What incentives would there be?

A couple of million a year from links on my page. Hence why I think the idea doesn't really have legs.

Nano Geek
July 14th, 2008, 04:29 PM
What incentives would there be?Probably you would get recognition at the top of the article or something like that.

fatality_uk
July 14th, 2008, 04:32 PM
But do you not think all that will happen is that articles about, bleeding edge tech stories, or popular TV programs or will have people wanting to sponsor, where as articles about, oh I don't know, crop rotation in the 14th century, will have almost no one interested, and will more than likely sit and gather dust?

geni
July 14th, 2008, 04:37 PM
I don't think he means that only the adopter could edit it. I thought that he was saying that people would help pay the cost for Wikipedia on certain articles.


And the people paying the cost whould indicate that while no pressure no pressure that if the article doesn't meet their idea of neutrality they will withdraw further support.

Lostincyberspace
July 14th, 2008, 05:04 PM
Asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33 is right on my idea I was just thinking that the people adopt it and help fund the upkeep on it. And yes most articles will not make any money but big ticket ones (ie: big companies and other wealthy organizations) will make quite a bit. and if somone wanted they could go and get some cheap one like "list of the largest boils in Texas" just to show their support. They still have to follow the nutrality rules, but they might get to put a (1) link along with their name at the top of the article.

I am not sure about geni I don't quite understand what he was trying to say.

geni
July 14th, 2008, 06:12 PM
Asjdfwejqrfjcvm msz34rq33 is right on my idea I was just thinking that the people adopt it and help fund the upkeep on it. And yes most articles will not make any money but big ticket ones (ie: big companies and other wealthy organizations) will make quite a bit. and if somone wanted they could go and get some cheap one like "list of the largest boils in Texas" just to show their support. They still have to follow the nutrality rules, but they might get to put a (1) link along with their name at the top of the article.


This is generaly refered to as advertiseing. The Wikipedia commnity is somewhat opposed.