Trying to make Wikipedia better, by working the system from the inside, as a trusted member and editor at Wikipedia, is itself not only honorable, but wise. It’s not a battle many would wish to fight. It’s an article about SEO worth it? Wikipedians are adversaries many prefer to simply ignore.
Rand Fishkin from SEOMoz is one of them. He also states what he things about how Wikipedia should work and does actually work.
Here’s how it should work:
- Read something about SEO on Wikipedia
- Think to yourself – huh, I wonder if that’s accurate
- Investigate the author a bit – are they reliable, generally honest, trustworthy, experienced?
- Investigate the subject matter – spend some time in the popular, well-regarded SEO blogs, forums and read some industry resources
- Come back and re-read
- If you still disagree, consider bringing it up in the discussion and be sure to mention that you’re not an industry expert, cite your sources and be respectful
- If you think you’ve got a real point, go ahead and make your edits
Here’s how it actually works:
- Read something about SEO on Wikipedia
- Note that it doesn’t match with your prejudiced, pre-conceived notions of SEO as spam
- Make a bunch of edits and deletions
- When pressed by industry experts, dismiss their sources as lacking credibility
- When pressed further, find Wikipedia rules that work in your favor – since you can’t argue from experience, use your powers of derision and dismissal combined with bureaucratic wordplay to frustrate and demoralize your opposition
- Find other inexperienced people with similar biases towards SEO and recruit them to your cause
Mhhh… True or Not True?
