Wikipedia

[Wise]

Most of keywords i typed in Google i found Wikipedia sites on top! But i checked most of Wiki sites not have backlinks maybe few and not from top pr sites! How it's possible? And Wiki sites have pr 5-6-7-8 etc. Backlinks teory not working for Wiki?

[lovekills_s]

Its content theory working for wiki..

If the content is genuine like wiki, and unique like anything, then just a few backlinks can do the magic. More over the interconnectivity of the pages is so awesome, that even if wiki has around 9,430,000 pages indexed, and all with unique content, very well connected, it doesnt have any problems ranking well for very high traffic keywords.

So wiki is a trend setter, and rest all are just followers..may be that makes the huge difference. But yeah, theres a lot to learn from wiki. Content is the ruling king of this era atleast..

Regards

[john alphaone]

Yahoo linkdomain search shows 54 million results for wikipedia.org, so they're not exactly short of backlinks either.

[David Eaves]

Indeed Wikipedia have loads of links internally and from other sites.

[LazySEO]

Wikipedia must get a ton of backlinks from people using their information. They're the ultimate example of creating content people want to link to.

[nethra]

Wiki works because of unique content, PR hardly makes a difference

[acc]

google shows 60100 links for wikipedia and yahoo 54 million
why google count very few links?
[

[Wise]

google shows 60100 links for wikipedia and yahoo 54 million
why google count very few links?
[

For example Wiki's "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host" on top 2 place for word "host" in google. And "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/host" have only 50 backlinks in google. I talk about this and many other top wiki's sites. BUT i checked wiki's sites and noted that most of the wiki's backlinks is from wiki's pages! They just backlinking on each other in their network.

[john alphaone]

Two things. First, you can't rely on Google's link: command as it only ever shows a small sample fo the total backlinks. Secondly, as long as your site has good backlinks then it isn't crucial that every page does. Pages will rank just fine on internal links alone, although direct links to inner pages may help them rank even better.

[ToolInventor]

For example Wiki's "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Host" on top 2 place for word "host" in google. And "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/host" have only 50 backlinks in google. I talk about this and many other top wiki's sites. BUT i checked wiki's sites and noted that most of the wiki's backlinks is from wiki's pages! They just backlinking on each other in their network.

It's not about the number of backlinks. If the site belong to Google's Trusted Sites, than any page of this site has very nice scores to get nice indexing.

A simple test can prove it. Imagine that hypothetically you can put some content on Wiki and on your site, simultaneously. Despite the content appeared on your site at the same time with Wiki, I give very high % that on Wiki page this content will dwell perfectly, and on your site it will be taken to supplemental results.

[technology]

It's not about the number of backlinks. If the site belong to Google's Trusted Sites, than any page of this site has very nice scores to get nice indexing.

A simple test can prove it. Imagine that hypothetically you can put some content on Wiki and on your site, simultaneously. Despite the content appeared on your site at the same time with Wiki, I give very high % that on Wiki page this content will dwell perfectly, and on your site it will be taken to supplemental results.

I have a doubt in this ..If i use this content first in my site and after some days in Wiki then also will the same problem arise for me??

[oseymour]

I thought google always "awards" the content where it finds it first

[michael814]

Most of keywords i typed in Google i found Wikipedia sites on top! But i checked most of Wiki sites not have backlinks maybe few and not from top pr sites! How it's possible? And Wiki sites have pr 5-6-7-8 etc. Backlinks teory not working for Wiki?

keep in mind that wikipedia also has strong internal navigation structure..

[Atle Iversen]

This is actually quite interesting...

I know that PR is *per page*, but the fact that even wikipedia articles with low "individual" PR will show first in the search results probably means that "internal" links from other high PR Wikipedia pages is more important than I thought ?

It sounds reasonable, though; as long as you have some high PR pages, other linked-to internal pages will benefit from this ? I didn't think they got much "love" from Google, but it seems I was wrong (and that is good !)....

[Jesus Nofollow]

Try searching Bing for a couple of keywords. I get results with nothing but international wikipedia pages for the first 30 results...

If I search for something generic like "host" I probably click through on a wiki listing. Links are not everything there is to Google. Google wants to show relevant content for search queries and you can't go wrong in showing wikipedia if they match search queries.

Search for "search engine optimization" and view the PR and backlinks of the top 20 results. At my location this doesn't follow linkcount or PR at all, but shows relevant and interesting sites and actualities about SEO.

Wouldn't be surprised to see Google making adjustments in their algo's for the bigger sites like: wikipedia, facebook, twitter.

But disregarding that, and viewed SEO theoretical: Wikipedia doesn't need backlinks to deeper pages to make those pages rank, because they have the max domain authority available. A CNN news story without external backlinks can outrank many other sites with many more backlinks, by sheer virtue of their domain authority/trust in the search engines.