3 ms·

I'd load it up with all the "semantic web" style things I could find. http://schema.org http://schema.org type of stuff. You could also see if it would be good

I'd load it up with all the "semantic web" style things I could find. http://schema.org http://schema.org type of stuff. You could also see if it would be good as a source for citations in the relevant wikipedia articles, but that's a whole project in itself probably.

AlexMuir 14y ago
I had a look at the Schema stuff - I actually use it on another site of mine ( http://thebigeat.com http://thebigeat.com ) for listings of takeaways, but it has made no difference SEO-wise and it tends to make my markup look like shit. But nevermind A/B testing, I am doing A-Z testing here - throw everything and see what sticks. I'm hesitant to go adding my site as a citation - it's a good idea but it just seems a bit black-hat for me. Hopefully it's something that might happen organically though.
- JonnieCache 14y ago
  Marching in and adding links to your site to WP is certainly a bad idea, as well as being plain ethically wrong. I was thinking more of turning up to the talk page for the car article and just offering them the content, but even that probably contravenes wiki-core directive #5749327. I mentioned it because your site seems like a genuinely good source that WP would be happy to use, making it a win-win. Don't try and use wikipedia for pagerank boys and girls.
  - dageshi 14y ago
    I've always had the impression that actually being linked from wikipedia isn't necessarily a good thing SEO wise. That is I think that a long time ago google decided to penalise sites being linked from major wiki's to stop them being spammed to death. But I'm basing that only rumour and supposition so certainly don't take it as truth.
sixQuarks 14y ago
Is there any evidence that this actually affects SEO or rankings?
- JonnieCache 14y ago
  Wikipedia is a perfect storm of pagerank so unless google have specifically made an exception for it, links from there must be pretty valuable. IANASEO.
  - rmc 14y ago
    For exactly this reason Wikipedia adds "nofollow" attributes to all external links on Wikipedia. You will get no SEO / page rank link juice from adding links to Wikipedia. You will probably get organic traffic though.
    - JonnieCache 14y ago
      Duh. Can't believe I forgot about that. Not really on the ball today. What am I even doing here? This is meant to be my holiday...
    - matznerd 14y ago
      Just because a link is "nofollow" does not mean you get no juice. Being linked to from wikipedia definitely helps a site's rankings...
    - vicks711 14y ago
      Argument that "nofollow" = "no seo juice" is debatable. Many SEO believe that lots of links from Wikipedia does help. I have no data of my own to support the above. Theory says that "nofollow" will not help is SEO.
  - Chico75 14y ago
    All externals links on wikipedia use the no-follow tag to prevent that type of spamming (http://www.searchenginejournal.com/all-wikipedia-links-are-now-nofollow/4288/ http://www.searchenginejournal.com/all-wikipedia-links-are-n...)
pretoriusB 14y ago
>I'd load it up with all the "semantic web" style things I could find. http://schema.org http://schema.org type of stuff. Why though? I think the manual "semantic web markup" is a failed promise, more than anything. The idea was flawed from the start for general web use (for one, you cannot trust content providers to add relevant semantic info, either because it's in their interest NOT to do so --e.g SEO spam--, or because they are not competent or lazy). Plus, the tools never materialised. It's another case of "worse is better".

AlexMuir 14y ago

I had a look at the Schema stuff - I actually use it on another site of mine ( http://thebigeat.com http://thebigeat.com ) for listings of takeaways, but it has made no difference SEO-wise and it tends to make my markup look like shit. But nevermind A/B testing, I am doing A-Z testing here - throw everything and see what sticks. I'm hesitant to go adding my site as a citation - it's a good idea but it just seems a bit black-hat for me. Hopefully it's something that might happen organically though.

JonnieCache 14y ago
Marching in and adding links to your site to WP is certainly a bad idea, as well as being plain ethically wrong. I was thinking more of turning up to the talk page for the car article and just offering them the content, but even that probably contravenes wiki-core directive #5749327. I mentioned it because your site seems like a genuinely good source that WP would be happy to use, making it a win-win. Don't try and use wikipedia for pagerank boys and girls.
- dageshi 14y ago
  I've always had the impression that actually being linked from wikipedia isn't necessarily a good thing SEO wise. That is I think that a long time ago google decided to penalise sites being linked from major wiki's to stop them being spammed to death. But I'm basing that only rumour and supposition so certainly don't take it as truth.

sixQuarks 14y ago

Is there any evidence that this actually affects SEO or rankings?

JonnieCache 14y ago
Wikipedia is a perfect storm of pagerank so unless google have specifically made an exception for it, links from there must be pretty valuable. IANASEO.
- rmc 14y ago
  For exactly this reason Wikipedia adds "nofollow" attributes to all external links on Wikipedia. You will get no SEO / page rank link juice from adding links to Wikipedia. You will probably get organic traffic though.
  - JonnieCache 14y ago
    Duh. Can't believe I forgot about that. Not really on the ball today. What am I even doing here? This is meant to be my holiday...
  - matznerd 14y ago
    Just because a link is "nofollow" does not mean you get no juice. Being linked to from wikipedia definitely helps a site's rankings...
  - vicks711 14y ago
    Argument that "nofollow" = "no seo juice" is debatable. Many SEO believe that lots of links from Wikipedia does help. I have no data of my own to support the above. Theory says that "nofollow" will not help is SEO.
- Chico75 14y ago
  All externals links on wikipedia use the no-follow tag to prevent that type of spamming (http://www.searchenginejournal.com/all-wikipedia-links-are-now-nofollow/4288/ http://www.searchenginejournal.com/all-wikipedia-links-are-n...)

pretoriusB 14y ago

>I'd load it up with all the "semantic web" style things I could find. http://schema.org http://schema.org type of stuff. Why though? I think the manual "semantic web markup" is a failed promise, more than anything. The idea was flawed from the start for general web use (for one, you cannot trust content providers to add relevant semantic info, either because it's in their interest NOT to do so --e.g SEO spam--, or because they are not competent or lazy). Plus, the tools never materialised. It's another case of "worse is better".