View Full Version : Creating a Wiki entry for your book?

02-23-2017, 12:34 PM
Has anyone done this?

On Colbert tonight Billy Gardell was on promoting his role in the TV series, Sun Records. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Records_(TV_series)) Not having heard of it and finding the interview intriguing I looked for more info on Google. Sure enough there was a Wiki entry.

So it dawned on me, I should consider making a Wiki entry when I'm finished with this book.

Book trailer, Wiki entry, I don't have a blog but I have purchased the domain name for the title I am planning on using.

Just wondered what other writers thought.

02-23-2017, 06:23 PM
To my understanding, Wikipedia is more intended to be sort of an online encyclopedia, rather than a site for promoting content in any shape or form. That said, many people (like you have mentioned) have had Wiki pages or entries created to theoretically help with granularly increasing their SEO because the page would theoretically have a link back to your actual book site. This is not exclusive to writers either. Sports figures, political figures, and a host of others that would like to maintain or increase their visibility (or online celebrity if you will) have all hired out to have someone create a Wiki page for them.

Notice my hinting there to have someone else create the page if you do want to go that route. Generally speaking, it's my understanding that the founders of the site want it to be as unbiased and neutral as possible (much like an encyclopedia would be). While it's definitely not 100% free of bias, they've done a pretty good job of policing things to get it as close to that as possible in my opinion. That's done by preventing people from creating their own Wiki pages.

In order to create (or edit) Wiki pages, you need to register or create an account. Now while you could theoretically create an account with a username that is completely disassociated from your name or your book name, but keep in mind that they can do things like log IP addresses and editors do look pretty intently at new pages and content all the time to ensure that articles/entries are created without bias. It still happens though, and I guess if you try to remain as neutral as possible, you could create your own page.

It all depends on what your goals are in creating the Wiki page though. As I see it, there are three reasons for possibly creating the Wiki page:

a. Add to the collective knowledge of all articles/entries that now exist on Wikipedia?
b. Add an article/entry that has a link to your own website (thereby helping to increase your own SEO)...
c. Everyone else is doing it, so it makes sense...

Just my 2, but if it's either b or c, I'd say don't do it. Those that use the logic of b don't really add that much SEO juice to their own site, and option c just seems a bit vain. Additionally, both b and c just kind of dilute the value of Wikipedia to a degree. Now the extent of dilution from adding only one more page really is close to nil, but I'd rather write something, and have enough people value my work as an author to say "Hey, someone should create a Wiki entry for this person. Others should know about them..."

One final thought here, if you do decide to go the route of creating the page, I know there are some people that actually make a living of creating websites, increasing SEO and such for their clients, which often includes creating Wiki pages. You may be able to find someone that does this sort of thing regularly and knows how to get the content up quickly and make it look professional so it gets past the editors and sticks.

Again, just my 2 in a world where pennies are meaningless! :)

the bunny hugger
02-23-2017, 08:30 PM
If you mean specifically Wikipedia, it has a well developed systems that rejects self-promotion. So basically if it is important enough for an impartial person to make a page and other impartial people to agree the page has merit, then it might happen. It's not something the author has much control over.

There are other wiki's out there that will take any listing that meets their criteria (e.g. genre, nationality etc).

02-23-2017, 08:34 PM
You'll get rejected in a heartbeat by the no-self-promo rule. Don't waste your time.

02-23-2017, 10:33 PM
For a book to have a Wikipedia entry, it has to meet notability guidelines. This means either the book or author have to be covered in multiple reliable sources. We're talking newspaper articles and that sort of thing. Anything else will get the article deleted.

As well as being deleted, there's also the risk that you'll get a lock on creating articles with that name. That happened to an author here because someone (not the author) repeatedly tried creating the article without sources. I tried to get the lock removed in that case, as there were enough sources to make an article, but wasn't successful. Once this happens, you're basically never going to have an article about you unless you get super famous, because it's hard to persuade the moderators to remove the block on the article name.

Even if you get through all this and have a well sourced article, be careful what you wish for. Have a scandal attached to you name? It'll be listed. Don't want your pen names connected? Tough luck. Someone figures out your real identity when you're using a pen name? Someone will include it in the article. You have no control over what's included. I really hope no one creates one for me, but I don't have any control over that either, other than not encouraging it.

If you really must make one, make sure you're notable first. The guidelines for what counts as notable are all there on the site.

02-24-2017, 02:05 AM
I've wondered the same thing and decided against it for all of the reasons listed here. It'll be nice when I'm big enough to have a page for my books, but it's not going to come from me.

Good call on grabbing the domain you wanted. I can recommend a site designer when you're ready. Although you should probably be blogging already. :)

02-24-2017, 02:30 AM
Thanks everybody for all the cautions and information, I didn't know all that. Very useful.