To establish a finest profile on the Wikipedia can be advantageous for the companies, but some of the managers must encourage ties with the site’s contributors rather than relying on the complicated marketing strategies. From the time it has commenced that is in the year 2001, Wikipedia has forwarded enough to represent much more than just to tag it as a free encyclopedia. Consistently it has been ranked as one of the globe’s top ten most popular websites, with the nonprofit and crowdsourced Wikipedia both provides readers with the finest information about the main subjects and gives those subjects particularly a sense of legitimacy. Boasting close to 5 million articles in English alone which has been edited by a community of almost 100,000 highly active contributors where the site gets nearly 500 million unique visitors every month for participation. Despite few major concerns about inaccuracies in specific entries, Wikipedia has secured a finest reputation as an easily navigable hub in order to generate the news accurately, in either history and background information on a vast array of topics.
Also Read: Future of Marketing – User Generated Content
For the companies, the collaborative projects like Wikipedia have a lot of upsides as they allow consumers to research independently, product information and a firm’s history, potentially reducing the customer service as well as the marketing costs. On the other side, many thousands of editors remain unaffiliated with companies, or their official channels of communication can create by specifically revising the entries. Also, this certainly raises one of the most important questions of how a firm should best manage its presence on Wikipedia especially if it has been in the news for some wrong reasons. After reviewing the recently conducted research and few company case studies, the prominent authors of a new paper significantly provide useful guidelines for how the emerging firms can make a splash on the Wikipedia, and thereby lend advice to the established companies looking to safeguard their reputation and ultimately cultivate an online presence. As Wikipedia is considered to be more collaborative where the companies fail to fulfill the aspect of having control over their image on the site on other social media platforms. Instead of that they prefer relying on a holistic approach that requires an effective approach to offline as well as the online strategies.
For the newly constructed firms, that particularly means initially establishing a strong online presence apart from Wikipedia as written by the authors because media coverage from independent sources and mentions on the social media can be turned into few important links and can increase the mentions of the company in other Wikipedia articles that will result in raising the odds that the firm will get a permanent entry of its own. It is also very important for the companies to work with respected contributors, who are more likely to create articles that remain on the site and attract attention. Companies should look to employees of their own who may be active and experienced Wikipedia editors, the authors note. But the preferable option lies in sending PR specialists to court Wikipedia’s at one of their many offline gatherings.
Although more concerns are headed over the conflicts of interest, as Wikipedia is believed to be discouraging the firms from editing their profiles and if they succeed in doing the same, their additions should be easily verifiable via secondary sources and appear as neutral as possible. Also above all these, the firms should also avoid advertising or inserting links to online stores that are against the type of covert marketing, and it’s important to monitor regularly the company profile.