If you have a quality site that is related to a particular article, you can try adding it to the external links area. If there's a disputed piece of information on the page that an article on your site can be cited for, you can add the page URL to the references area.
But keep in mind that people are notified when changes are made to pages that they may not even be interested in, and they will certainly investigate your site to make sure its not an MFA, spam links are often removed from pages on an hourly basis. If you have a noncommercial site dedicated to peanuts, for example, perhaps you can post a link to a page related to peanuts.
I only obtain links from wikipedia if one of my noncommercial sites happens to have some information which can verify or dispute a particular piece of info that someone added to that page (I've picked up some high PR backlinks like that, but it was definitely appropriate use and no one has removed said links in over a year). Most of the time, I'm on there removing spam links from pages that I'm interested in if they don't supplement the article in some fashion.
[edited by: DXL at 1:11 am (utc) on Sep. 19, 2006]
Unless a commercial site provides good quality, and non-biased, information - I can't see a link from Wikipedia lasting too long before it is removed.
However, I don't think there's much disputing that a relevant link from Wikipedia would do a website a world of good. Potentially, it will bring in 'quality' traffic and I would guess that it would be considered fairly favourably by the search engines.
Were you looking for advice about how to actually place a link on Wikipedia?
I found the help I was looking for.
Appreciate the feedback.
and just to clarify the help you guys gave me was exactly what I was looking for.
I have a commercial site that doesn't have that much information to offer, and was able to get away with a link on a certain page.
I do in fact have some completely original content that no one else offers, so either this is whats keeping me afloat, or no body noticed for some reason.
As an alternative to spamming DMOZ, Wikipedia can't be beat. If establishing your credibility is important, then dropping a link in Wikipedia is a no brainer.
It's not the same as a free directory because it's heavily edited. But it's worthwhile to wedge a link in there anyway. You never know if it will end up staying.
Be forewarned that if you persist in aggressively adding your link after it's been removed, the admins there may block your IP. However, you can easily circumvent that by unplugging your DSL modem and receiving a fresh IP.
I wouldn't recommend the aggressive approach, though. Don't know who they might report your site too...
If you persist in anonymous edits to a page, changing your IP isn't the only solution because eventually a registered member can set up a page protection that temporarily disallows edits from anonymous editors, or from members who have not been registered long. If someone anonymous then decides to use their long-standing account and its apparent that they are using sockpuppet accounts, they can be banned.
Moral to the story is: avoid persistent updates if your link is removed a few times. Members can set up a feature that allows them to be contacted when specific pages are updated. I know a few ways to fly under the radar, but I'm not so sure I want to give my best secret away ;)
>>>they can be banned.
If someone wants to break into your house, no matter how much protection and alarms you throw at it, that someone will still get in.
Same goes for Wikipedia. You can throw up barriers but it won't stop the determined. The zombie masses will still be there breaking down the door...
Oh, and spamming wiki's isn't limited to wikipedia. There's a whole range of wiki software powering wikis across the web, fresh meat for the link hungry.
First research all the flavors Wiki software comes in. Then grab a snippet from the copyright or some other footprint. Then do a search for it. Voila!
I dropped a link a few months ago on Wiki which has resulted in at least 10 other backlinks. Perks of having a content site.
After reading this thread I was motivated to get off my can and submit some links to wikipedia that I haven't gotten to yet.
I think I was detected by a bot because all of my edites were reverted by a user using VS(VandalSniper).
I tried to add 10 links in 10 different sections right after each other. I probably set off an alarm.
Does anyone know a safe rate that I can add links to avoid detection again? I'll try different IP's next time.
And by the way the sites I was submitting were squeeky clean. I don't even have adsense on them and almost all of them are in DMOZ.
I have submitted similar sites in the past and the links stuck.
[edited by: MrSpeed at 11:39 am (utc) on Sep. 22, 2006]
I add one link a week, if that, sometimes its just once a month if its relevant to the article. If you add three links in a day, you're going to get red flagged. Not by any particular anti-vandal bot, but more than likely someone will notice you adding links and will inevitably take a look at your contributions page to see what other pages you have recently edited. Makes it easy for someone to visit every page you have and revert all the edits you made.
And as mentioned a few posts back, an indirect benefit of links on the site is that any website using Wikipedia content generally retains the links section as well, so over time you benefit from backlinks from other sites (though a handful of sites will scrape the content but exclude the links section). I started getting backlinks from Wikipedia before I really understood the value of backlinks and PR, I just added links because I had some really great articles that people who visited those pages would probably be interested in (or that verify a questionable piece of information that people requested a citation for).
Once you've got your links in set up a "watch list" so you can tell when someone else removes your links, learn how to use the wikipedia three revert rule [google.com] to your advantage. Also be aware that threshold for inclusion in wikipedia [google.com] is verifiability not truth.
You always play the game a little better if you know how to work the rules.
>>>But it's worthwhile to wedge a link in there anyway. You never know if it will end up staying.
Agreed. We had a website that we put into wikipedia - but we carefully put a link to an informational section of our otherwise commercial site - in addition, the outbound links were missing links to the information we linked to. It's stayed for a year now. You never know until you try. We find sometimes that corporate clients that belong in wikipedia on their brand page either don't submit there sites, or other "official" sites for the same brand in different countries.