Getting links on Wikipedia is like virtual gold to many webmasters. Why? Because these links often end up on high high traffic pages, meaning they’re quality, free backlinks to a site. However, the biggest reason these links have become so prized probably has more to do with the fact that it’s an “accomplishment” to get a link on Wikipedia without an editor removing it within minutes, hours, or days. So are these links on Wikipedia a worthwhile pursuit in Internet marketing, whether you put them there yourself or not? If you receive a link on Wikipedia from a random member who thinks your site is a worthwhile resource, would you be thrilled, or would you really not give a damn either way? Essentially… is Wikipedia a fab link-giver for marketing purposes, or just a fad marketing tactic on its way out the door?
How it Works:
Wikipedia can basically be edited by anyone. You can add content, links, or even change or remove the content of others. What was being done for quite a while was that webmasters and Internet marketers were adding their links (or their clients’ links) to relevant pages on Wikipedia, for a potentially high traffic backlink. Your link can get their by you placing it there yourself, having someone else place it on your behalf, or having a random member think your site is of high enough quality to justify adding it.
Fad or Fab?
FAD – Here’s why – This one’s pretty cut and dry. Wikipedia isn’t worthwhile as a marketing tactic, because the site itself considers these kinds of links to be spam. Even if you add quality information, citing your site as the source, anyone can remove it, and editors often will.
Frankly, their backlinks aren’t anything special to begin with. Wikipedia has always been a “lazy marketer’s tool” where they can find potential link sources across many niches all in one place. There are far better ways to get high quality backlinks, and ones where you don’t have to worry about them being removed after you put in the effort, even if the site really was a perfectly valid resource.
From a more personal standpoint, I don’t take anything on Wikipedia as the truth, and wouldn’t want my business or websites at this point to even be associated with one of their pages, because of their serious credibility issues. But that’s what happens when you have a community written and edited site that’s supposed to serve as a factual resource. Just my $.02.
