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 use of search engine optimization (SEO) techniques for the purpose of maximizing the search engine results ranking of topics covered in Wikipedia, thereby elevating their prominence in the service of commercial interests, non-profit groups, spiritual communities, political advocacy, or other causes. The techniques can include article creation, internal linking, and nomination for main-page appearances via the did you know? and today's featured article processes.

Santorum neologism

The term "wikibombing" came to public attention in June 2011 via a story in The Register about the Wikipedia article campaign for "santorum" neologism. The Wikipedia article describes a Google bomb campaign by American columnist Dan Savage directed against the Republican politician Rick Santorum. The aim of the campaign was to create a vulgar sexual neologism out of Santorum's surname, and spread it via the blogosphere.

Edits per month to the article about the Dan Savage santorum campaign. A clear spike is visible beginning in May 2011.

In late April and early May 2011 the press reported that Santorum might run for president of the United States. In early May the article on Dan Savage's campaign—then titled "Santorum (sexual neologism)," and giving the impression that the word had entered into use—was expanded more than three-fold to over 5,000 words and added to several navigation templates, most of them newly created. These templates were added to hundreds of articles, creating several hundred in-bound links. In addition, seven articles related to Dan Savage, whose biography contains a section on the controversy and a link to the article, were nominated for DYK appearances on the main page within the space of about a week; two appeared on the main page on the same day.

As the article about the neologism campaign became one of the top results in Google searches for Santorum's name, some editors, including Jimbo Wales, expressed concern that the article had become part of the Google bomb attack, rather than simply reporting it. They argued that this compromised the project's political neutrality and violated Wikipedia's policy on biographical material about living persons. The result was widespread controversy on Wikipedia, a discussion on the wikien-l mailing list, an RfC on renaming or merging the article, a failed request for arbitration, and the story in The Register on the "wikibombing" incident.

Typical Wikipedia editing activities that can be misinterpreted as Wikibombing

• Creating articles
• Adding sourced content to existing articles
• Adding images to articles
• Putting new articles in the "Did You Know" queue for the main page
• Adding events to "Selected anniversaries" queue for the main page
• Adding links back to articles
• Creating templates and portals
• Improving articles to Featured Article status
• Nominating articles to the "Today's Featured Article" queue for the main page

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 can 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:

• creating excessively detailed coverage of commercial products or controversial topics (such as citing and linking dozens of trivial references, rather than a representative sample of major coverage);
• creating multiple navigation templates regarding the article sought to be promoted, and adding these to multiple unrelated articles (this may raise SEO concerns); and
• submitting multiple related articles for main page appearances (e.g., in the "Did you know ..." or "Today's featured article" areas).

Such actions, undertaken unilaterally, 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.

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

Further reading

• Taylor, Mike. "Wikipedia Breathes New Life Into Seminal Scientology Expose", FishbowlNY, March 15, 2010.