I'd rather a write-up that made clear Wikipedia is not for "getting" an article in. That's a meme to discourage not support.
Businesses that don't merit one do a disservice to themselves and us by putting effort into trying to "get" one anyway. We do a disservice by suggesting it can be done by such means (even if it sometimes could for borderline cases). FT2 On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 9:25 AM, Carcharoth <[email protected]>wrote: > On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 4:45 PM, WereSpielChequers > <[email protected]> wrote: > > One of those steps being "Check to see if anyone already working at > > your company is a Wikipedia volunteer. If so, that person can be a > > valuable resource to help you find your best strategy for getting > > included." Now that sounds like a pretty good reason not to talk about > > this particular hobby at work, or to edit in your real name. > > I agree absolutely! I'm fortunate in that where I work doesn't have a > Wikipedia entry, though there are sporadic mentions within other > articles (one red-link, one dead link in a reference, one external > link, and one incidental mention). I would be horrified if I was ever > approached to "help" with anything Wikipedia-related to where I work. > I have, sometimes, looked up some of the people I occasionally > correspond with, or who crop up during the course of my work, and some > of them have Wikipedia articles, but most don't. > > The article also says "The more mentions you have in the press, and > the more visibility you have in social media and blogs". This > completely misunderstands what a reliable source is and the difference > between having a big (and usually temporary) media presence, and an > enduring presence that generates its own press. There is a difference > between media puffery of a company and independent, industry-wide > evaluation by those with an interest in getting things right (and not > just putting spin on things) - this is usually related to "getting > things right" in terms of investing in or taking over a business. > > They also miss the most obvious method. Grow your company until it is > so big that it will get an article anyway. > > The brutal truth is, that if you are a small company, unless you get > big you will either not amount to much (and end up as a footnote in > history, if that), or you will get big and get taken over, or take > others over, or you will fold and vanish. The real test of enduring > notability in business is whether a company or brandname is remembered > after it has gone or been swallowed up by others. If no-one remembers > much about something 5 years later, it probably wasn't worth writing > about in the first place, unless it endured for several decades at > least or did something that garnered a lot of attention, and maybe not > even then. > > Carcharoth > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > [email protected] > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
