<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wikipedia is droping in most recent update</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html</link>
	<description>Expert advice on search engine optimization</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 07:21:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Algorithm Update At Google? &#124; TheVanBlog</title>
		<link>http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-45146</link>
		<dc:creator>Algorithm Update At Google? &#124; TheVanBlog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Jan 2008 03:40:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-45146</guid>
		<description>[...] Wikipedia is dropping in most recent update - David Ogletree [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Wikipedia is dropping in most recent update - David Ogletree [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gerard</title>
		<link>http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-4536</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerard</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 15:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-4536</guid>
		<description>*?#@! WIkipedia. Its lame.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>*?#@! WIkipedia. Its lame.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Ruplinger</title>
		<link>http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-3382</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Ruplinger</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:25:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ogletreeseo.com/142.html#comment-3382</guid>
		<description>I doubt that Google is manually adjusting its rankings to penalize Wikipedia, however, I do think when Wikipedia went nofollow, they actually hurt their authority.  

You're probably well aware of why, but I'd like to point it out to your readers.  

If we remember good ole Brinn and Page when they first developed the pagerank system, it was based off of how academic journals worked.  An article could be judged on its importance based on how many others referred to it.  However, a journal article that didn't cite any resources on its own would be viewed with a suspicous eye.  When applied to a website, that means outgoing links help rankings, not hurt. 

I, for one, am glad to see Wikipedia getting penalized for going all nofollow.  I know they had to deal with a lot of spam, but you'd think they could have come up with something better than their everything is nofollow solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I doubt that Google is manually adjusting its rankings to penalize Wikipedia, however, I do think when Wikipedia went nofollow, they actually hurt their authority.  </p>
<p>You&#8217;re probably well aware of why, but I&#8217;d like to point it out to your readers.  </p>
<p>If we remember good ole Brinn and Page when they first developed the pagerank system, it was based off of how academic journals worked.  An article could be judged on its importance based on how many others referred to it.  However, a journal article that didn&#8217;t cite any resources on its own would be viewed with a suspicous eye.  When applied to a website, that means outgoing links help rankings, not hurt. </p>
<p>I, for one, am glad to see Wikipedia getting penalized for going all nofollow.  I know they had to deal with a lot of spam, but you&#8217;d think they could have come up with something better than their everything is nofollow solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
