| Revision as of 17:34, 26 June 2011 editSlimVirgin (talk | contribs)172,064 editsm →Guidance: typo← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:12, 27 June 2011 edit undoCla68 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Pending changes reviewers48,127 edits →Guidance: add quote boxNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| ==Guidance== | ==Guidance== | ||
| {| class="toccolours" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 2em; font-size: 85%; background:#c6dbf7; width:30em; max-width: 27%;" cellspacing="5" | |||
| |style="text-align: left;" |"This case has exposed a gaping security hole in Misplaced Pages with no obvious easy means of mending. Every day this saga drags on, we're effectively writing a "how to" guide on how to use templates, DYK (which generates buttloads of automatically created internal links) and strategically placed links on external sites to manipulate Misplaced Pages's relationship with Google to game the PageRank system. Making ] the first hit on Google for a search on said politician/celebrity/rival product's name is a service for which companies would pay a fortune (if you were a sugar producer, how much would having ] be the first Google result for "artificial sweetener" be worth?), and we've now created a join-the-dots guide ..." | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="text-align: left;" |'''Misplaced Pages arbitrator''', June 2011<ref>Frank, p. 561.</ref> | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="text-align: left;" | | |||
| |} | |||
| Creating or expanding articles, linking them with templates, and nominating them for DYK are standard Misplaced Pages practices. In the case of noted SEO attempts, Google bombs, or other political controversies—in which ''coverage'' of the SEO attempt might be confused with its ''perpetuation''—these practices require caution to avoid the appearance of promotion. | Creating or expanding articles, linking them with templates, and nominating them for DYK are standard Misplaced Pages practices. In the case of noted SEO attempts, Google bombs, or other political controversies—in which ''coverage'' of the SEO attempt might be confused with its ''perpetuation''—these practices require caution to avoid the appearance of promotion. | ||
Revision as of 00:12, 27 June 2011
| This project page is being considered for deletion in accordance with Misplaced Pages's deletion policy.
Please discuss the matter at this page's entry on the Miscellany for deletion page. You are welcome to edit this page, but please do not blank, merge, or move it, or remove this notice, while the discussion is in progress. For more information, see the Guide to deletion.%5B%5BWikipedia%3AMiscellany+for+deletion%2FWikipedia%3AWikibombing+%28SEO%29%5D%5DMFD Maintenance use only: Place either {{mfd}} or {{mfdx|2nd}} on the page nominated for deletion. Then subst {{subst:mfd2|pg=Misplaced Pages:Wikibombing (SEO)|text=...}} ~~~~ to create the discussion subpage. Finally, subst {{subst:mfd3|pg=Misplaced Pages:Wikibombing (SEO)}} into the MfD log. Please consider notifying the author(s) by placing{{subst:MFDWarning|Misplaced Pages:Wikibombing (SEO)}} ~~~~on their talk page(s). |
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. |
Wikibombing refers to the use of search engine optimization (SEO) techniques for the purpose of maximizing the search engine results ranking of topics covered in Misplaced Pages. This may have the effect of elevating their prominence in major search engines. The term is a reference to the well-established practice of Google bombing.
Guidance
| "This case has exposed a gaping security hole in Misplaced Pages with no obvious easy means of mending. Every day this saga drags on, we're effectively writing a "how to" guide on how to use templates, DYK (which generates buttloads of automatically created internal links) and strategically placed links on external sites to manipulate Misplaced Pages's relationship with Google to game the PageRank system. Making Criticism of (insert politician/celebrity/rival product) the first hit on Google for a search on said politician/celebrity/rival product's name is a service for which companies would pay a fortune (if you were a sugar producer, how much would having Aspartame controversy be the first Google result for "artificial sweetener" be worth?), and we've now created a join-the-dots guide ..." |
| Misplaced Pages arbitrator, June 2011 |
Creating or expanding articles, linking them with templates, and nominating them for DYK are standard Misplaced Pages practices. In the case of noted SEO attempts, Google bombs, or other political controversies—in which coverage of the SEO attempt might be confused with its perpetuation—these practices require caution to avoid the appearance of promotion.
The following actions may create the appearance of promotion, both within the Misplaced Pages community and elsewhere:
- excessively detailed coverage of a topic, particularly a commercial or political one (such as citing and linking dozens of trivial references, rather than a representative sample of major coverage)
- creating multiple navigation templates or portals that link to an article, and adding these to multiple unrelated articles
- submitting multiple related articles for inclusion on Misplaced Pages main page (e.g., in the "Did you know ...", "Today's featured article", or "Selected anniversaries" areas).
Such actions, undertaken unilaterally and without discussion on an appropriate talkpage, may leave the community unsure of your motivations. Before pursuing the above, editors are encouraged to seek broad input from talk pages, noticeboards, relevant WikiProjects, or (in the case of DYK nominations) the DYK talk page, to determine the boundary between legitimate coverage and promotion.
When encountering the apparent promotion of a topic by another editor or editors, it is important to assume good faith. It's natural to want to link to articles that you've been working hard on, and editors may fall into the trap of promotion without realizing it. When dealing with a political controversy or suspected SEO attempt, discuss the apparent promotion with the involved editors and, if necessary, seek broad input on talk pages, noticeboards and WikiProjects. Keep in mind that none of the actions listed above proves that the editor has a conflict of interest or is editing for political or commercial reasons; these behaviors are often part of normal editing and in fact are sometimes encouraged. Editors who behave as described above often have no intent to boost search rankings and may well be unaware of the effects of their actions.
See also
- WP:Activist
- WP:Advocacy
- WP:Advertising
- WP:Coatrack
- WP:DYK#Selection_criteria ("Articles and hooks that focus unduly on negative aspects of living individuals or promote one side of an ongoing dispute should be avoided.")
- nofollow
- WP:NPOV
- WP:Paid editing
- WP:Search engine optimization
- WP:Soap
- Frank, p. 561.