Are you a Google Analytics enthusiast?
More SEO Content
Wikipedia For Company Name?
Posted 04 October 2007 - 12:31 PM
Certainly large companies (like Wal-Mart and IBM) and well known products (iPod) have Wiki entries, but not sure if this is appropriate for smaller companies or niche products. Perhaps the answer lies in how the information is presented. For example if it is factual, rather than overtly promotional.
Has anyone else created Wiki entries along these lines?
Posted 04 October 2007 - 03:31 PM
Posted 04 October 2007 - 06:38 PM
It doesn't hurt to try it, but whether the editors let it stand or not is another story.
Posted 05 October 2007 - 01:02 AM
The problem is that when people write about themselves (or their clients), the results aren't what an encyclopedia user wants. Just kick back and wait for somebody else to start the article, or go get involved in doing something else and maybe somebody will notice you. You can put a short blurb on your Wikipedia user page about who you are and what you do.
Posted 05 October 2007 - 01:21 AM
I would maybe think about it as part of a general pr/viral strategy. 'company xyz is a 24/7 plumbing service that hosts the world championship plunger competition' kind of the older fashioned version of link bait- headline bait. But you'd need a pr/viral strategy first.
Posted 05 October 2007 - 09:37 AM
In fact, it could hurt if you try and are an idiot about it.
If you are going to do it, for heaven's sake, make sure you don't do it from an IP address that can be connected to the company.
If you're promoting a product from ACME Corp. and the IP you post from is registered to ACME Corp., then you run the risk of not only having your submission killed, but the potential of negative blowback. I can't tell you how many articles I've seen where an agressive PR person has been outed for being that dumb. I have also seen articles where the IP address was traced to a PR/design/whatever company whose web site listed ACME Corp. as a client.
The wikipedia people are protective of what they've created and they know how to use computers. If you're trying to game them, they may not take kindly to it, and you may have to suffer the consequences.
Posted 05 October 2007 - 11:17 AM
Well that's not quite the case. The wikipedia FAQ section says "It is generally recommended that you not write about yourself, or companies and organizations you are associated with.... if it's notable enough, someone else will add it".
There certainly are numerous entries that have been flagged for quick delete due to blatant self promotion. The bar for submissions is set high (as it should be) with the need for outiside, verifiable references to back up the information and the need to be "noteworthy" for encyclopedic purposes.
It seems to me that if you do it right (within the established guidelines) you should be okay. The problem of course is there is a lot of grey area and the "tone" of the entry needs to clearly be neutral and factual, not of a promotional nature.
Posted 05 October 2007 - 09:38 PM
Posted 06 October 2007 - 12:54 AM
Another thing is if you just sign up an account and add one article, the Wikipedia system will see that you don't have any street cred and whatever you post will be scrutinized harder. So if you want to edit Wikipedia, set aside a day or two to catch up on contributing useful additions to article stubs and so on. But even after that, don't spam them with self-promotional content. If someone adds content about you, then you can edit things that are blatantly erroneous so having that contribution history can come in handy there.
Posted 06 October 2007 - 01:00 AM
But you can't write about yourself because thats boring and fake. You need to make it easier for your audience to write about you. You can also participate and build up a reputation as an expert in your field. You can also make contacts and friends. You might learn something.
Hiding behind an IP address so you can evade the rules is a bad idea because it's easy to spot fake articles by the tone and language and then figure out who wrote them. Don't go that route. Wikipedia has people who like to hunt sneaks for fun. Think about whether you would enjoy being exposed and having every possible negative fact in the public record added to your article, one that shows up directly beneath your own website in the SERPs for a search on your name.
Posted 06 October 2007 - 03:00 AM
Is it? interesting.
Posted 06 October 2007 - 10:41 PM
Jonathan I know Wikipidedia seemingly has the top ranking for every subject out there. But how would it help a company like this? Unless it was a company in the news or something.
Posted 07 October 2007 - 01:00 AM
I'd say that if there's an article about a company, there will be a link to said company.
While external links may be nofollowed, I would bet that the traffic it would generate could be considered fairly qualified. People just read and article about the company and what it does... now they want more - CLICK.
Posted 07 October 2007 - 03:37 AM
Posted 09 October 2007 - 11:04 AM
Thanks roxyyo. The suggestion of Aboutus.org is a good one. Another I can think of would be squidoo.com. If the point is simply getting the word out then sources other than Wikipedia would likely have an eaiser standard to meet - that is not requiring outside references, etc.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users