Comments on: Britannica 2.0 Adapts Wikipedia Model, Attacks Google SERPs

By: Michael Martinez

Michael Martinez — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 20:04:29 +0000

What an awful proposition.

By: Caleb

Caleb — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:13:26 +0000

This is hilarious. Poor Jorge doesn’t understand the internet and wants to compete with Wikipedia. The first step wouldn’t be to make Britannica a wiki (which is backwards). Instead, he should be making the Britannica website NOT as awful as possible.

By: Pejus

Pejus — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 14:38:11 +0000

After reading this article I took a look at Brittanica. It sucks and is not useful compared to Wikipedia. Wikipedia rocks. It is very easy to use and no advertisements. So Mr. Jorge, STOP WHINING!!! First improve your site and come out with a better product. Try your cheap tricks, to promote your useless website elsewhere. Wikipedia is the best and all in all its for the people, by the people and of the people.

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:59:05 +0000

I just hope they’ve looked very closely at the problems with wikipedia so they can avoid the same pitfalls.

By: alexc

alexc — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 13:34:42 +0000

Our data shows that britannica.com has got 14,476,222 external backlinks from 130,262 external domains, where as wikipedia.org has got 1,323,660,270 (almost 100 times more!) external backlinks and from 1,831,623 referring domains (well over 10 times more).

There is no suprise therefore that Wikipedia is so frequently on top in SERPs.

By: Paul Caudell

Paul Caudell — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:45:04 +0000

Great news, even better news if they provide follow links!