Is Wikipedia a direct competitor to an e-commerce term???

[adam westrop]

OK, so im doing SEO pretty hard at the moment and for 3 big 'shopping' terms I will break the 1st page of Google no problem, and 2 I should get to position 1, page 1 within enough time. However for term 3, Wikipedia is sitting pretty at the top.

Ive done an analysis of this Wikipedia pages backlinks and there are some damn good authoritive backlinks in their and some old backlinks meaning a lot of juice and hard to outrank... However I will within time, probably 6 months + though.

But the main question is, if I am sitting at position 2 behind Wikipedia for a shopping term, e.g. Think a branded product, e.g. 'Apple iphone' for example but a product you would only literally search for if you want to buy (As they have been around for decades), will being number 2 from Wikipedia actually be such a bad thing?

I myself in that situation would recognise Wikipedia as a dictionary site and then move onto sites 2 and 3 descriptions really.... But would the average online consumer do that as well? Im guessing the average online consumer knows of Wikipedia by now as well.

[Wes888]

I think Wikipedia complements a shopping site. People go to Wikipedia get more information about a product but when it is time to make a purchase they go to an e-commerce or affiliate site.

After they visit Wikipedia they go to your site to purchase. Although being at #1 is definitely better.

[yukon]

I look at wikipedia as historical research.

If I was shopping for an iphone, wikipedia wouldn't even be an option for me. I know wikipedia doesn't sell products & I don't need to know the year Apple was founded.

I would think #2 in the SERPs wouldn't be so bad. I would still shoot for the #1 position.