Wikipedia - what's the use?

Who really edits wikipedia? Why do I get the sense it may be site operators?

Editing some articles and integrating valuable facts for the site visitors, they’re being taken down.

And now they use nofollow. Why even bother with them? They wouldn’t take some major points that readers should know.

i’m sure they were taken down for a reason

maybe they were points that readers shouldn’t really know in quite the way you posted them


as for the nofollow, that only makes sense – it removes the incentive for dubious updates by self-serving people looking only for backlinks

Ah but Nay! Actually I have a number of referenced edits with wikipedia, and they are somewhat comparable – meaning that key value to the reader would be lost if the edit is removed (my own personal criteria for placing the edit) The difference here, is the main topic area, which seems to have an editor who really doesn’t want to approve much of anything, even though the page isn’t locked. It’s that simple.

maybe they were points that readers shouldn’t really know in quite the way you posted them
That’s pretty conciliatory.

The backlink issue is another thing. I made the edits figuring there would be nofollow in place, thinking…we’ll it would still be nice if a visitor might check the reference out, which only seems fair, otherwise what is it for? Then, there are the thousands of sites who have been referenced up til the change, then thinking there isn’t no ‘nofollow’ but now there is. The nofollow is still tracked, regardless of course.

My ‘to do’ schedule for wikipedia includes corrections for syntax, which gets no reference – but why spend time on it with the odds for denial (among this topic area)? I do want to help but I am definitely not going to waste time if I feel there is an untoward element involved.

And whether someone is only looking for a backlink, anyone must know that wikipedia performs edits to maintain quality, right? Which goes back to the real question – who really does the updates?