If your website is directly under Wikipedia and you want to beat them you can make changes to the Wikipedia page to give yourself a small advantage. This wonâ€™t work if they are beating you by a long shot. Just go in and edit the page so that the keyword is not mentioned as many times. Try to make sure the article still reads well. If you remove all of them or make the article read bad somebody will just come in and fix it.
I wrote a few weeks ago that Google was devaluing Wikipedia in the SERPS. ( “Google and Wikipedia seem to be having a lovers spat”). At the time I could only see the results on some test data center that Google likes to serve me every so often. Well now I am actually seeing it on actual datacenters that I know the IP of. These datacenters seem to have an index update on them.
Wikipedia has been in the news a lot lately because it put the nofollow tag on certain links posted by authors. Well I think that is not enough. I think they need to exclude their whole site from the search engines and every page needs to load a warning first or the site needs to just shut down. I think Wikipedia was a good idea before the whole world knew about it. The problem with the idea of a WiKi encyclopedia is that you canâ€™t trust it. The founder of Wikipedia says that he gets about 10 e-mail messages a week from students who complain that Wikipedia has earned them fail grades. Read more…
Google seems to be devaluing Wikipedia. I hope Google is finally turning down the knobs on Wikipedia. I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia, is set to launch an internet search engine with amazon.com that he hopes will become a rival to Google and Yahoo that he announced back in December.
There were just too many terms where Wikipedia would beat out sites that should be number one just because Google thinks it is the authority on everything. Wikipedia still ranks for a lot of terms but I think Google is finally taking away their cart blanche on ranking. This could be one of Googleâ€™s hiccups where they went back to some old algo or to some backup algo or some test. I hope it is not. Wikipedia should rank for some terms when people have linked to it but there is no reason for them to rank for terms when that page has no back links at all and is beating out sites that have all the right stuff to rank higher.
I only have one example and I would rather not disclose it and everybody I asked said they have seen the same thing but did not disclose their terms either. Let me know if you have any good examples I could use. From what I can tell Wikipedia has lost ground on pages that have no back links at all.
The results I’m getting are from some secret Google data center that I can’t access via ip. I can only get it from www.google.com. I wonder if it is some test server. I hope it is something that will go live.
I was looking over at www.ask.com and noticed that several terms brought up a special Wikipedia result at the top of the page above the ads.
Also DaveN on the Webmasterradio show www.strikepoint.co.uk pointed out that Ask is now showing the ads with a blue background instead of making them look like the organic results. I have no idea what kind of deal Ask has with Wikipedia but I think this is new.
Wikipedia has added V7ndotcom Elursrebmem and it is being considered for deletion. There are some that believe that now anybody with a contest can get a entry into wikipedia. I personaly think it should stay. This is a big topic in our wolrd right now. Wikipedia should have it listed it is part of net history. Reguardless of what you think of the guy putting it on.