Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Wikipedia's Content Ripped Off More Egregiously Than Usual

Posted by timothy on from the hope-it-saves-wikipedia-some-hosting-fees dept.

Ultraexactzz writes "Wikipedia's content is licensed under the GFDL, which permits such content to be copied with attribution — and Wikipedia is used to its content being copied and mirrored. However, a new website at e-wikipedia.net appears to have taken this a step further by mirroring the entire English Wikipedia — articles, logos, disclaimers, userpages, and all. Compare Wikipedia's About page with e-wikipedia.net's. The site even adds to Wikipedia's normally ad-free interface by including text ads." Just try logging in or actually editing an article, though, and you'll get the message "The requested URL /w/index.php was not found on this server. Additionally, a 404 Not Found error was encountered while trying to use an ErrorDocument to handle the request." If there's credit here, I don't see it — sure looks like it's intentionally misleading readers.

7 of 284 comments (clear)

  1. first by Dragoonkain · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    post (maybe?)

  2. whoisGuard by jrathe89 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    This comment will not be saved until you click the Submit button below. You must wait a little bit before using this resource; please try again later. To confirm you're not a script,

  3. Czech Wikipedia reaches 100,000 articles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    In more Wikipedia news, the Czech version of Wikipedia now has over 100 articles.

  4. moD 3own by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    same year, BSD House... pathetic. g0als I personally

  5. Wikipedia is run by deletionist bastards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    article deleted by deletionist bastards

  6. Fris7 4sot!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    to survive at aal Raymond in his

  7. Re:MOD PARENT UP by DaveV1.0 · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    And, I am amazed at how many people think Wikipedia has any built-in protections.

    If an admin wants an article slanted to his or her point of view, then said admin simply locks the article and writes it the way they want it to read.

    Wikipedia is not a valid source.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.