Wikipedia citation stuffing method done by competitor shared by me with you

Ahmed Al Banna

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2023
Messages
447
Reaction score
304
I've purchased an expired domain with some juicy backlinks and while doing deeper research I came across one of the referring URLs. It was an independently owned website, not a big brand but it had impressive domain metrics. I dug deeper and found it to have a lot of wikipedia backlinks. It didn't take long for me to figure out their strategy. I've seen this done before but this site does it on massive level. People do this method in basic form and I am sharing super charged variation of this method with you, its evergreen and works for any niche.

Their website is a blog that writes reviews and news about certain niche. They have been around for several years and have decent website and content but its nothing special and many PBN sites would pass for the type of site that they run. There is nothing special about content they post and anyone can easily do the same for their niche. In fact for my own project I am adding same type of posts and will apply same method.

Method is extremely simple but with a little twist. They write good articles and get a lot of citations but not just from any Wikipedia pages BUT from major brands. For example if their website was about tech niche they would have articles written about each each Google Pixel model released and get multiple citations from Google Pixel Wikepedia page. If they write about Samsung Galaxy models they would get citations directly on Samsung Wikipedia page. This is how I figured out their method, on major brand Wikipedia page there were many citations and I found them to have 12 coming from 1 page. As I've mentioned they have been around for several years and have been doing it for a while and because of that have multiple citations from big brands.

Now I have a clear way of getting these types of Wikepedia links for my own niche. Competitor uses very plain and simple articles that are used for citations and I plan to put more effort and create better articles. They would be more informative, have more custom photos / videos and therefore provide more value to anyone. They would be easier to use for citations when paying editors but due to their informative nature perhaps some others will find it on their own and use it for citation on other pages.
 
Method? ... after writing informational article do we have to manually add citation in wikipedia.... moderators will remove the link.
 
Method? ... after writing informational article do we have to manually add citation in wikipedia.... moderators will remove the link.
You need to devote more time to reading before commenting.

As I said you still need to pay someone to get your citation added. I never said that people can post any article and get citation added on their own. From beginning I said that you need to have quality article that would pass approval of any moderator. Everyone knows that adding links or citations to Wikipedia on your own gets your poor results. If you want links not to be removed by other moderators you need to have them added by trusted Wikipedia accounts.
 
I tested by placing 20-40 links on wikipedia(different website each).

It gave 0.00% SEO boost.
that's odd!

I know that Wikipedia links are not as powerful as they once were, but even 1 link it should still do something (move secondary / long tail keywords if nothing else), so it's probably the links are nofollow (never checked Wiki links, so I'm not sure whether they're DF or NF)... or they're not live anymore / yet... or maybe you've pointed them to pages that target competitive keywords. Any of these could be the culprits..

Also, are the wikipedia pages indexed? Probably yes, but I wanted to make sure :)
 
that's odd!

I know that Wikipedia links are not as powerful as they once were, but even 1 link it should still do something (move secondary / long tail keywords if nothing else), so it's probably the links are nofollow (never checked Wiki links, so I'm not sure whether they're DF or NF)... or they're not live anymore / yet... or maybe you've pointed them to pages that target competitive keywords. Any of these could be the culprits..

Also, are the wikipedia pages indexed? Probably yes, but I wanted to make sure :)
as I remembered from previous posts PinguSpy is always in super crowded niches so maybe that's the reason but I'm not sure.
 
I tested by placing 20-40 links on wikipedia(different website each).

It gave 0.00% SEO boost.
I've seen the lack of jump in the serps as well when expecting something magical to happen with them.

On the other hand, it is very good for your backlink portfolio to show you are well rounded in your SEO and probably worth having one or two.

I have one site that no longer can get a link on Wikipedia as we have too many per their support and that site has not generated strong serp movement from them.
 
that's odd!

I know that Wikipedia links are not as powerful as they once were, but even 1 link it should still do something (move secondary / long tail keywords if nothing else), so it's probably the links are nofollow (never checked Wiki links, so I'm not sure whether they're DF or NF)... or they're not live anymore / yet... or maybe you've pointed them to pages that target competitive keywords. Any of these could be the culprits..

Also, are the wikipedia pages indexed? Probably yes, but I wanted to make sure :)
It is my tier 1 links including my own money site. For tier 1, the majority of links come from high authority sites such as ibtimes, apnews, jpost, outlookindia, tmcnet, laweekly, yahoo news, etc. After more than 2 weeks. There is no serp improvement either for my tier 1 or my money site.
 
the majority of links come from high authority sites such as ibtimes, apnews, jpost, outlookindia, tmcnet, laweekly, yahoo news, etc. After more than 2 weeks. There is no serp improvement either for my tier 1 or my money site.
this means that you're targeting tough keywords. With such links (and assuming that your site structure is good enough for the link juice to flow into easier to rank pages) you should have seen a boost in rankings, 100%...

Thanks for clarifying!

as I remembered from previous posts PinguSpy is always in super crowded niches so maybe that's the reason but I'm not sure.
yep, I figured :)
 
I tested by placing 20-40 links on wikipedia(different website each).

It gave 0.00% SEO boost.
Site that I use as case study has DA 53, PA 48. Moz only found 10 US Wikipedia links but that wasn't accurate since I found 5+ citations per 1 major brand US page where it was inserted. They also have Wikipedia citations from different countries. All together I estimate that they have over 100 Wikipedia links for sure spread as few citations per major brand.

It seems to be working for them. They are in similar niche as one of my current projects and rank for many easy to rank keywords that I will try to rank for.

Ranking Keywords​


7.8k
Keywords in #1-3
149

Keywords in #4-10
750
 
Back
Top