[img src="" caption="" credit="" alt=""]
While doing some research on various Wikis out there, I've found that a company called the Information Superbrand (check out the whois info here) registered the domain www.pedia.com, as well as over two hundred various ****pedia.com domain names, such as travelpedia.com or tvpedia.com. In some cases, a domain wasn't available so they just used subdomains, for example parent.pedia.com.
The interesting thing about all these domains that they're not real wikis; in fact, they don't contain any useful information whatsoever except for an occasional link and a generic text that says:
"Our Mission:
To create the most complete and definitive source of Television information available anywhere.
Our Goal:
To be your source for Television related information. We will supply our visitors with up to date news, stories and specials about Television through our TV News Links Section."
[img src="" caption="" credit="" alt=""]
Obviously, it's not illegal to register all these domains and do nothing useful with them, and it's a known practice that's been done, well, since the very beginnings of the internet. There's no law against having a domain ending in "pedia" and not have a wiki on it.
But it still strikes me as...wrong. Wikis and wikipedia are in most cases by their definition free, open projects that aim to create a comprehensive resource of information on a certain subject. The domain name ending in "pedia" is practically a standard for wikis; from the top of my head, I can name a couple - www.conservapedia.com, www.artcyclopedia.com logospedia.com, lostpedia.com - and there are hundreds more. Now, instead of using these domains for something useful, you've got a bunch of completely useless carbon copied sites - they're not even properly monetized - which will only confuse potential visitors. And I think it sucks.