Would Copy/Pasting from WikiPedia hurt your PR?

Is it against TOS?

[dailypress]

I was wondering if it is against TOS and also if it would hurt the PR and effect the SEO if I were to copy/paste context from WikiPedia for one of my websites that is a collection of video clips.

Since I have read in a thread here that duplicate content hurts the PR I was assuming using WikiPedia description will do the damage. Any ideas?

[davidgid]

I am quoting a big chunck of wiki on one of my pages and it is serp 3. As for TOS I think wiki might be fairgame. I would love to know for sure

Here is a quote from wiki GNU

2. VERBATIM COPYING

You may copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially, provided that this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document are reproduced in all copies, and that you add no other conditions whatsoever to those of this License. You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute. However, you may accept compensation in exchange for copies. If you distribute a large enough number of copies you must also follow the conditions in section 3.

You may also lend copies, under the same conditions stated above, and you may publicly display copies.

[dauction]

dailypress duplicate copy is just that ..duplicate copy. Yes it will affect your rankings.. even more so if that is the only textual content on your page (other than your videos).

If you are looking for textual content that is relational to your videos then write original content or hire it out .

You'll be offering content no other site has ..

Think of it this way ..do you want to copy and give links (votes) to wiki or would you rather create your own content have other website copy it and link (votes)to you ..

add value dont just duplicate

[mattg3]

You will go down in Dual Content issues. I have made some films partially narrated with own and Wiki stuff, why reinvent the wheel so was the wisdom at the time. If you put the same context on Yahoo or Youtube these come up. Your own webserver will die a slow death. Google does not pick up the value added content (although it's funnily linked in many WP pages since a while), just goes by text. Invent some new text although they are fluctuating too. WP is on three million webservers. It's the kiss of death.

Avoid WP like the pest..

[dailypress]

dauction - The reason why I would like to add text is for my PR to increase (PR currently 0/10 on my video pages which consists of only videos). Since I have only put a title with video clips my website does not appear on google search (other than ONE page with 3 lines of text; so I am also assuming content is critical).

As you mentioned it would be advisable to write my own text, which I think I will do next weekend.

I will let you know in a new post if my PR increased.

thanks for the encouragements.

[dauction]

Dont get hung up on "PR" either ..

Traffic is what matters ..not PR

Write content that is reflective of your videos..reviews? comments? history? etc.. ..

consider creating a comment form and let your visitors post comments and help in the creation of your textual content

Write it for your visitors .. ..then come back IF NEEEDED and squeeze in a keyword phrase or 2 for the se bot .

Dont get in a rush .. just take your time and do a nice job..

Whatever you write half the people will agree/love,funny , politically right side etc.. and the other half will think you're an imbecile ..

half the people will link to you because they agree with what you write the other half will link to you because they want to show everyone what an imbecile looks like lol

So long as you get the links ..;)

[dailypress]

They are mostly entertainment videos so I dont think people will judge. :) I try to avoid political/religious videos. I care more for my 2cent clicks. lol

[trinorthlighting]

Without permission from wikipedia, they could file a DMCA complaint against you and get you removed from the index.

It might be better writing your own description and tossing a link to wiki.

[zCat]

Without permission from wikipedia, they could file a DMCA complaint against you and get you removed from the index.

You already have explicit permission from Wikipedia, as long as you abide by the terms of the GFDL... That's why for a while, half the internet seemed to consist out of Wikipedia clones.

[mattg3]

Without permission from wikipedia, they could file a DMCA complaint against you and get you removed from the index.

Like in the software world, WP was created to copy and expand and improve on it.
"The license Wikipedia uses grants free access to our content in the same sense as free software is licensed freely. This principle is known as copyleft. That is to say, Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed so long as the new version grants the same freedoms to others and acknowledges the authors of the Wikipedia article used (a direct link back to the article satisfies our author credit requirement). Wikipedia articles therefore will remain free forever and can be used by anybody subject to certain restrictions, most of which serve to ensure that freedom.

That was initially the whole point. Like with the whole free software, you give the content free and the form of delivery is the important thing. For example Support on Linux distros and so on.
There was a webserver in Germany that had WP for mobiles

In reverse WP grew as WP authors stole content and Google didn't react fast enough to a human spam/steal bot.

Now we are in a stupid situation, evergreen content is worthless and if you use it, ie in films there is always someone who doesn't get that it's SUPPOSED to be used elsewhere.

The WP Google combo is about the best proof that content is getting increasingly worthless. That's why I did videos for a while, but I guess we are reaching the end of the line here too, as soon every baby, puppy and Coke and Menthos bottle on the planet will have been filmed and uploaded on youtube et al.