Wikipedia Link Nazi’s

Jaimie of SEO Egghead has a wonderful post on Wikipedia editor being link nazi’s, with a wonderful picture to illustrate just what he means with the term “nazi” as well. His experiences with the editorial team of Wikipedia: he wrote the article on link-bait and quoted Rand Fishkin, Matt Cutts, Aaron Wall, and linked to all three of those, and himself in his book, linking to the Amazon page for his book. Guess what? All those links were removed…

Now to me, this sounds familiar, people who actually know something about the subject they’re writing about getting modded down by the admins of Wikipedia, IMHO correctly dubbed link nazi’s by Jaimi. All his sources, as well as his examples were removed, leaving a bad article. Sigh… Will they ever get it? You can’t build an online encyclopedia without having links people… That’s how the web works…

[tags]wikipedia, linkbuilding, seo[/tags]

Tags:


Yoast.com runs on the Genesis Framework

Genesis theme frameworkThe Genesis Framework empowers you to quickly and easily build incredible websites with WordPress. Whether you're a novice or advanced developer, Genesis provides you with the secure and search-engine-optimized foundation that takes WordPress to places you never thought it could go.

Read our Genesis review or get Genesis now!

11 Responses

  1. SintBy Sint on 17 November, 2006

    Wikipedia has a large set of rules and guidelines that have been made up to maintain the quality of the encyclopedia information. In theory they seem to fit right, but they also can deliver a lot of frustration. Some of the Wikipedia moderators take their jobs very seriously and personal, which often means that a decision is based on who’s got the longest breath.
    My own experience is that this is just something you have to live with. Every project has its weaknesses and Wikipedia having a kind of anarchistic hierarchy is a role model. The best way is just trying to convince that you and the admin person have the same interest: to have great articles.
    Sometimes having someone else write your article and link to your site as a source works better than building your own article and then put a link at the bottom.

  2. Joost de ValkBy Joost de Valk on 17 November, 2006

    Yeah there are ways around it, the system is flawed though, and that’s annoying since it’s so trusted by Google…

  3. Dave DavisBy Dave Davis on 21 November, 2006

    Well, like everything else, if they don’t change or adapt soon, something bad will happen. While I appreciate they have to stop spam, they also need to balance.

  4. Joost de ValkBy Joost de Valk on 21 November, 2006

    Dave: i too want them to fight spam, they just have to be subtle in doing it.

  5. Dave DavisBy Dave Davis on 21 November, 2006

    I agree fully, but you hit the nail in the head. Some editors are just…. well, too strict. They are forgetting what it’s all about.

  6. Joost de ValkBy Joost de Valk on 21 November, 2006

    I’ve recently started “helping out”, i hope i can do some good :)

  7. Dave DavisBy Dave Davis on 21 November, 2006

    I did a while back. I was editing an article on something that I would consider myself an EXPERT on. It was an extremely niche topic and very localized. After a week, a meta removed most of what I posted. There was no external links as the topic was so specific, and it really annoyed me as the meta clearly did not know about the topic.

    Oh well. Sunrise, Sunset.

  8. Joost de ValkBy Joost de Valk on 21 November, 2006

    i’ve just entered in the discussion on the WP:SPAM pages, and gone editing out real spam links myself.

  9. SintBy Sint on 23 November, 2006

    A lot of editors not only want to stop spam. They also seem to be afraid for information on external websites of higher quality than Wikipedia’s articles. Maybe they think a visitor clicking on an external link and thus leaving Wikipedia is a threath to their community.

  10. Joost de ValkBy Joost de Valk on 23 November, 2006

    That’s exactly the feeling i get sometimes.

  11. KevinBy Kevin on 26 August, 2009

    I attempted to add a link to my employer’s site included with a pre-existing list of our competitor sites, it gets deleted because it is an external link. I attempt to make a wikipedia page for my employer similar to a pre-existing wikipedia page for our direct competitor and link to it instead of an external link (as per stated wikipedia instructions), the page gets deleted stating it violates the copyright of the web site my employer owns the copyright of even though I inform the admin that we are the owners of the copyright and thus there is no copyright violation. I attempt to add a link to our site under a pre-existing page section titled ‘External Links’ on a page with a topic directly related to our site under a pre-existing external link, the admin deletes our link because it is ‘an external link’ but leaves the other external link above it and also leaves the ‘External links’ section up on the page but the bans my ip address from editing Wikipedia for a year.

    I’ve come the conclusion that admins on Wikipedia are biased, break their own rules as it suits them, and are unreasonably mean to new comers even if the new comers are attempting to follow the stated Wikipedia rules.