I am surprised, more and more often, by really well written Wikipedia pages for very obscure people and services.
I so far assumed they are written by themselves, or rather a PR professional on their behalf.I just couldn’t believe there is enough people who care about XX to properly maintain that article, and even have it much more elaborate than for instance the one about YY.
Also, my favorite trick to use for content-based pet projects in Slovenia is, to contribute part of the content to an under resourced Wikipedia, and cite the new project as the source. Everybody wins.
So I guess I’m surprised that Wikipedia is not under attack by mercenaries who should know everything about content business. It might be that Wikipedians are such merciless defenders of the shrine, that nobody evil dares to touch it.
PR News Poll: Wikipedia Mostly Unexplored By PR Pros By Bill Miltenberg, PR News There’s been an ongoing debate between leading PR pros and Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales about PR’s participation in the creation and editing of Wikipedia posts. Wales says that objectivity and transparency is lacking among PR pros, especially within agencies.
I think it’s a fascinating topic, and one we will hear more about this year, as the content marketing goes mainstream. What if Wikipedians were paid to edit Wikipedia full time?
- I Use Wikipedia More Than Makeup (techcrunch.com)
- Wikipedia & the PR Pro: Friend or Foe? (forbes.com)
- Making the Case for PR Pros Editing Wikipedia (prsay.prsa.org)
- Wikipedia and PR have got to work it out (stuartbruce.biz)
- A Big PR Firm Got Caught Editing Its Clients’ Wikipedia Pages, And Jimmy Wales Is NOT Amused (businessinsider.com)