Full Version: Using Wikipedia as a marketing tool - SMEweb
<img alt="" height="1" width="1" />Using [b]Wikipedia as a marketing tool[/b]
SMEweb
Eloqua, a provider of Revenue Performance Management solutions, today published the Grande Guide to Wikipedia. The latest e-book in Eloqua's award-winning “Grande Guide†series aims to shed light on the inner workings of Wikipedia, one of the most ...
View the article
That's just a copy of this, published by Eloqua itself.
The Guide.
And the author's blog, The Wikipedian..
Summary: He's drunk the Kool-Aid, heavily. Generally good advice, but would not prepare an editor for running into serious opposition. However, most people who just want to get an article on their company up, his target audience, could find this decent advice.
However, they'll probably be much more efficient with their time if they hire Greg. And if they are small enough that they can't afford that -- how much does Greg charge? -- then they probably would be wasting their time, unless they somehow have become notable in a way easy to establish. And they don't have natural enemies in the editorial corps, or run into an admin with a bug.
If your goal is to create an article on your company, he's right. Of course, if you are blocked, you can create a new account without pretending you are anyone else, and it won't be noticed unless you do stuff to cause it to be noticed. What do we think about someone who put's up a notice: "I'm not anyone else." That's pretending to be someone else, right? Does it work? I didn't think so.
But by this time your company article will be on someone's watchlist, and if you at all resemble, in any of many details, a blocked editor, they will toss insane amounts of effort at blocking you. At that point you are in Advanced Wiki Warfare territory, don't try this at home.
I evade blocks by being myself, identifying my IP edits. Lots of banned or blocked editors do that: JedRothwell, Moulton. Is that "socking."? Only in Wikipedia-speak, not in the original meaning of the word. When such an IP is blocked for block evasion, it means "You did not log in so that the software would keep you from editing, so you are, by definition, disruptive. Stop it!" Repeated until they hope the person goes away or dies, whichever comes first. It can take a long time.... Somehow many blocked editors are just not impressed.
Or, shall we say, I identify any edits that might be within my old topic areas. Probably. Because I've dumped "cooperation" with Wikipedia as useless, I cannot predict what I'll do in the future, and, by the same token, neither can they. The guidelines and policies have now become irrelevant to me, because they were irrelevant to them. I'll now act according to what actually works for me. And at the moment, IP editing, with self-reversion, is working. The edits are being seen and reverted back in.
They cannot stop this, they can only inhibit it by causing collateral damage.
If they start blocking the IP for harmless edits, self-identified, then I might stop identifying. That's easier for me, and the only reason I'm doing it now is to avoid IP blocking. They can work themselves into a froth, for all I care. In fact, I like it, when they do. Means I'm winning the game of Whack-a-Mole. Part of that game is getting the player holding the hammer to swing and miss.
And, somehow, that hammer just doesn't reach to where I live. It's absolutely painless, once I detached from any sort of idea that I had to be "cooperative."
Whatever they do to make my editing more difficult, I respond by withdrawing the forms of cooperation that previously made it more difficult, compensating. Natural consequences, reaching equilibrium.
The Guide.
And the author's blog, The Wikipedian..
Summary: He's drunk the Kool-Aid, heavily. Generally good advice, but would not prepare an editor for running into serious opposition. However, most people who just want to get an article on their company up, his target audience, could find this decent advice.
However, they'll probably be much more efficient with their time if they hire Greg. And if they are small enough that they can't afford that -- how much does Greg charge? -- then they probably would be wasting their time, unless they somehow have become notable in a way easy to establish. And they don't have natural enemies in the editorial corps, or run into an admin with a bug.
QUOTE
Checkuser: If there is one thing you should never, ever do, it's creating multiple accounts and pretending they belong to different people. Some editors try this technique to win an argument or stack a vote. If you do, and someone gets wise, this closely held administrative tool will catch you. (Seriously, don't ever do this.)
If your goal is to create an article on your company, he's right. Of course, if you are blocked, you can create a new account without pretending you are anyone else, and it won't be noticed unless you do stuff to cause it to be noticed. What do we think about someone who put's up a notice: "I'm not anyone else." That's pretending to be someone else, right? Does it work? I didn't think so.
But by this time your company article will be on someone's watchlist, and if you at all resemble, in any of many details, a blocked editor, they will toss insane amounts of effort at blocking you. At that point you are in Advanced Wiki Warfare territory, don't try this at home.
I evade blocks by being myself, identifying my IP edits. Lots of banned or blocked editors do that: JedRothwell, Moulton. Is that "socking."? Only in Wikipedia-speak, not in the original meaning of the word. When such an IP is blocked for block evasion, it means "You did not log in so that the software would keep you from editing, so you are, by definition, disruptive. Stop it!" Repeated until they hope the person goes away or dies, whichever comes first. It can take a long time.... Somehow many blocked editors are just not impressed.
Or, shall we say, I identify any edits that might be within my old topic areas. Probably. Because I've dumped "cooperation" with Wikipedia as useless, I cannot predict what I'll do in the future, and, by the same token, neither can they. The guidelines and policies have now become irrelevant to me, because they were irrelevant to them. I'll now act according to what actually works for me. And at the moment, IP editing, with self-reversion, is working. The edits are being seen and reverted back in.
They cannot stop this, they can only inhibit it by causing collateral damage.
If they start blocking the IP for harmless edits, self-identified, then I might stop identifying. That's easier for me, and the only reason I'm doing it now is to avoid IP blocking. They can work themselves into a froth, for all I care. In fact, I like it, when they do. Means I'm winning the game of Whack-a-Mole. Part of that game is getting the player holding the hammer to swing and miss.
And, somehow, that hammer just doesn't reach to where I live. It's absolutely painless, once I detached from any sort of idea that I had to be "cooperative."
Whatever they do to make my editing more difficult, I respond by withdrawing the forms of cooperation that previously made it more difficult, compensating. Natural consequences, reaching equilibrium.
QUOTE(Abd @ Wed 4th May 2011, 1:59pm) 
However, they'll probably be much more efficient with their time if they hire Greg. And if they are small enough that they can't afford that -- how much does Greg charge?
I work for very cheap, since I also enjoy editing Wikipedia for payment.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.