Wikipedia:Wikibombing (SEO)

"WP:BOMB" redirects here. For the essay on overuse of tags, see Wikipedia:Tag bombing. For overuse of citations, see Wikipedia:Bombardment.

Wikibombing refers to the appearance that an editor may be using search engine optimization (SEO) techniques for the purpose of maximizing the search engine results ranking of topics covered in Wikipedia. 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

Creating or expanding articles, linking them with templates, and nominating them for DYK are standard Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia's 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 intention of boosting search rankings and may be unaware that they are doing so. Since the goal of Wikipedia is to be a widely-used encyclopedic resource, high page rankings and page rank boosting edits are not to be avoided per se. Wikipedia would hardly be fulfilling its project mandates if its pages couldn't be found easily, that is to say near the top of any relevant list of search results. It is when Wikipedia and/or its relevant article becomes a part of the very story being covered that more vigorous pruning may be warranted. Please refer to the applicable policies for further details.

See also

• WP:Activist
• WP:Advocacy
• Wikipedia:Bombardment
• Wikipedia:Citation overkill
• 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.")
• WP:LINKFARM
• nofollow
• WP:NPOV
• WP:Paid editing
• WP:Search engine optimization
• WP:Soap

Further reading

• Johnson, Ryan (19 June 2010).Wikipedia spotlight draws 20,000 to GF article - Website rep: Opportunity to share more about city "can't be understated".Grand Forks Herald (ND):p. A6.