现实有点触目惊心：贵公司客户“首选”的信息源，也就是他们用来了解贵公司概况、历史和相关事实的网站绝大多数时候都错误百出。我指的是维基百科（Wikipedia）。在谷歌（Google）和必应（Bing）上，这一在线百科全书在70%的情况下（谷歌英国更是高达99%）都位列搜索结果前3位。然而，维基百科上的公司介绍页面有60%都含有事实性错误。

    贵公司及其主要高管、投资者，甚至产品的页面很有可能就属于这60%。兹事体大，是因为如今一些大型新闻机构里，总有不够勤快的记者在报道中整段借用维基百科上的信息。如果你认为自己的潜在客户、合作者和新员工不会依赖维基百科上的信息做决策，那你就是在自欺欺人。今天，维基百科已成为全世界网民的重要信息来源。

    所以，你不但得要有个维基页面，而且它一定要公允准确地反映贵公司的真实情况。但是因为代码笨拙，规则不透明，网络社区敌视情绪日益高涨，维基百科已成为无数初创公司、小型企业、社会名流和著名高管们新的眼中钉，肉中刺。我之所以了解这一点，是因为他们都在向我寻求帮助。

下面就为大家支几个招：

1. 提高媒体知名度才能拥有维基页面

    不是每个人都能拥有维基百科的页面。要想拥有维基页面，必须达到网站所规定的“著名程度”的门槛才行。你的企业可能是个本地机构，每年服务好几百万人，但如果你希望在维基页面上显示的特定信息从来没有被知名媒体报道过，那么从维基百科的角度看，这些信息就不值得登载。如果某种言论从未被知名媒体明确表达过或支持过，维基百科的编辑就会把它从数据库中剔除。

    因此，如果你想要有个维基页面，就需要可信赖的第三方媒体对你进行报道，比如报纸、杂志、书籍和期刊，而不是你自己的个人博客、新闻稿或Facebook的个人主页。

    要做到这一点，其实并没有想象的那样难。如果是从零开始，你可以去HelpAReporterOut.com看看，从知名记者的免费、简单的报道起步。如果你希望公众了解公司的某些信息，最好是将它们透露给媒体，否则维基百科无法呈现这些信息。实际上我的建议是，在和媒体交流时，脑子里得时刻记着维基百科的页面才行。

2. 切勿盲目编辑自己的页面

    营销人员和公关专家试图控制客户的专题页面，而维基百科对这种做法极其警惕。他们的理由十分充分：有利益冲突的编辑往往会违背维基百科的神圣原则，比如保持观点中立及充分论据的原则。不要认为直接编辑自己的页面就能挽回局面，这么做可能适得其反，让局面变得不可收拾。

    但这并不意味着你完全无能为力——因为如果你本人或某个员工从来没建立过维基账户，没花时间了解维基百科的运作模式，就永远不会知道对自己的页面到底能做什么、不能做什么。如果正好读到了一篇上乘的报道，那就往维基的相关主题页面上添加一些内容吧。清除那些空白的URL链接，做点修改语法和编辑语句的工作，观察网上社区的情况，弄清维基编辑的独特个性。这是一个费时费事的试错过程，但很重要。

    Here's the scary reality: your customers "go-to" source for information -- where they learn about your company, read your history and get their facts -- is wrong the majority of the time. I'm talking about Wikipedia. The online encyclopedia shows up in the top 3 results of more than 70% of Google and Bing searches (99% for Google UK) yet 60% of company Wikipedia pages contain factual errors.

    Odds are, those numbers include pages about your company, its prominent executives, investors, and possibly even its products. And that matters because today lazy journalists from major publications copy entire Wikipedia paragraphs in their coverage. If you think that your potential customers, partners, and new hires aren't using Wikipedia to make decisions, then you're fooling yourself. Wikipedia informs the world.

    So it's critical that you not only have a Wikipedia page, but that it fairly and accurately presents the truth about your business. But with its clunky code, obscure rules, and an increasingly hostile community, Wikipedia has become the new thorn in the side of countless startups, small businesses, celebrities, and prominent executives. I know this because they come to me for help.

Here's how you can solve the problem:

1. Be notable enough for a page

    Not anyone can have a Wikipedia page. Wikipedia pages must meet the site's threshold of "notability." Your business could be a local institution, serving millions of people a year, but if you or the specific fact you wish were mentioned on your page has never been written about by the right media outlets, it's not noteworthy, as far as Wikipedia is concerned. If a statement hasn't been explicitly stated or backed by a reputable media outlet, Wikipedia editors yank it from the database.

    So if you want a page, seek out coverage from third-party, reliable sources. Think newspapers, magazines, books, and journals, not your personal blog, press releases, or a Facebook page.

MORE: The myth of the 'entrepreneurial employee'

    But it's easier to hack this than you think. If you're starting from scratch, check out HelpAReporterOut.com and start getting free, easy press from reputable reporters. If there are things you want people to know about your business, you better make sure you've communicated them to the media. Otherwise Wikipedia is incapable of presenting that information. I'm actually suggesting you speak to the media with your Wikipedia page in mind.

2. Do not blindly edit your own page

    Wikipedia is extremely wary of marketers and PR experts trying to control their clients' Wikipedia pages. And for good reason. Editors with conflicts of interest often violate Wikipedia's sacred rules, like having a neutral point of view and verifiability. You might think that rushing in to edit your page will fix things, but it will likely lead to disaster.

    But that isn't to say you shouldn't contribute to the site at all -- because if you or an employee have never built an account and spent some time learning how Wikipedia works, you'll never know what you can and can't do with your own page. Read a good news article? Add a few facts to the subject's Wikipedia page. Clean up a few bare URL references. Do a bit of grammar and copyediting. Observe the community and figure out the quirks of the Wikipedia editors. This is tedious trial and error, but it's important.

    这里有一个简单的窍门，能让你修改、创建内容，同时不用冒任何风险。直接进入该条目的“对话”页面（维基百科的每个页面都有一个讨论区），而不要直接进入文章页面，然后陈述一下你希望修订该条目的内容及原因。你需要向网上社区交待自己的身份以及与该公司的关系，如果你所陈述的事实和信息源可靠，他们很可能会采纳你的意见。

    如果你想编辑某条内容，可以提出申请，在申请中清楚列出第三方可靠信息源的链接，并注明想要在维基页面上直接引用的语句。维基编辑会确保这些内容采用的是中立口吻，然后将其转变为可在维基页面上浏览的代码。甚至还可以请求编辑创建一个关于你的页面，只要你提供知名媒体的相关报道，并确保你的请求符合维基的编辑方针。不过要知道，没人会为你创建刻意吹捧的内容。

3. 以其人之道还治其人之身

    如果一些怀有恶意的人或心怀不满的员工利用他们对维基百科规则的了解对你诽谤中伤怎么办？我的回答可能会引起争议（毕竟，我是个媒体推手），那就是：以其人之道，还治其人之身。

    维基百科是个严苛的网上社区，拥有一套让人困惑的规则。但是请记住，他们还有这么一条表述清楚的规则：忽略所有规则。有时候，你不得不打破规则，以求获得公平的对待。没错，我要奉劝你的是，你可能得在自己或他人的页面上秘密上传一些内容，确保事实真相得以公开。如果你这么做了，请掩盖好所有痕迹，而且不要太贪心，只需要修正那些不实内容即可。市面上有一些帮人搞定维基问题的公司。我不会推荐它们任何一家，但是确实有这样的公司存在。

    我有无数令人胆战心惊的故事可以和大家分享——从一些公司雇佣第三方来控制竞争对手的维基页面，到持有偏见的编辑故意歪曲他们所憎恶的人物或公司，不一而足。有一次，我受人所托，全面修改一位公众颇为关注的演艺明星的维基页面。结果不到一周后，就有一家知名小报对这位艺人进行了整整6页的报道，大篇幅照搬了我们在维基页面上用到的溢美之词。我惊出一身冷汗，生怕这件事变成一桩丑闻。但所幸事情并未如此发展，没人注意到这个记者不光照搬了维基百科上的构思，还大段大段地抄袭了其中的文字。

    你必须要掌控自己的维基页面，否则就有可能像我的朋友那样陷入尴尬的境地。我的一位朋友不久前被一份全国性大报的记者提问道：“据维基百科称，您是一位失败的编剧。这是真的吗？”

    雷恩•霍立德是《相信我，我在撒谎：一位媒体推手的自白》（Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator）一书（http://trustmeimlying.com/）的作者。他是一位专为作家和品牌服务的媒体战略专家。

    译者：清远

    Here's a simple trick to improve your entries or make one without doing anything risky. Go to the Talk page of the entry rather than the article itself (every Wikipedia page has a Discussion section) and post your thoughts on what you'd like fixed. You need to tell the community who you are and your affiliation with the company, but if the facts and sources are on your side, they may listen.

    If there is a specific edit you want, post a request for that edit. In your request, clearly lay out links to third-party, reliable sources, and provide direct quotations from those sources that will be used for a Wikipedia page. A Wikipedia editor will help ensure that those edits are written in a neutral tone and turned into code viewable on the Wikipedia page.You can even request that another editor create a page about you, provided that you include notable press and steer them in the right direction. But remember, no one will do puff piece for you.

3. Fight fire with fire

    What do you do when a hater or a disgruntled employee uses their knowledge of the rules of Wikipedia to slander and defame you? My answer may be controversial (I am, after all, a media manipulator): Fight fire with fire.

    Wikipedia is a tough community with confusing rules. But remember they also have this clearly stated rule: Ignore All Rules. Sometimes you have to break the rules to get your fair shake. Yes, I am saying you may have to surreptitiously post on your page or other pages to make sure the truth gets out. If you do this, cover your tracks, don't get greedy, and fix only what is untrue. There are a few firms out there who can take care of Wikipedia problems discretely. I won't recommend any, but they are out there.

    I can share a million horror stories from companies paying firms to control their competitors' Wikipedia pages to biased editors out to define the people or companies they hate. I once handled the overhaul of one high-profile starlet's Wikipedia page, and that was followed less than a week later by a six-page spread in a big tabloid that so obviously used our positive and flattering language from Wikipedia that I was almost scared it would be its own scandal. But it wasn't. No one noticed that the reporter had essentially ripped off Wikipedia for not only his story ideas.

    You have to control your page. Otherwise, you risk putting yourself in the awkward position a friend of mine found himself in when he was recently asked the following question by a national newspaper reporter: "So, according to Wikipedia, you're a failed screenwriter. Is that true?"

    Ryan Holiday is the author of Trust Me, I'm Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator (Portfolio; http://trustmeimlying.com/). He is a media strategist for authors and brands.