Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2017. Since 2008 COMPANIES AND WIKIPEDIA: FRIEND OR FOE?

In this report: European, Italian, German and Swiss editions (Updated in May 2017)

Wikipedia is the fifth most visited website in the world, with articles about companies perennially well positioned on the first page of search results.

Yet despite this visibility, the articles about the 100 largest companies in Europe, the 100 largest in Italy, the 30 German companies included in the DAX 30 index and the 48 largest in Switzerland often lack information and present critical issues. With the already small number of active Wikipedia editors decreasing, this situation is likely to worsen.

Some companies think that by editing articles about themselves they have an easy workaround. However, any company that does so runs the risk of violating Wikipedia’s rules, therefore creating a hostile environment. The potential resulting reputational backlash would be enormous.

Since the first edition in 2008 our research revealed the low quality of the vast majority of company Wikipedia pages. For this reason, Lundquist has refined a set of tested guidelines, in order to help companies to safely approach the free encyclopedia as well as engage with its vast online community in a constructive manner. This proposed alliance entails abiding by Wikipedia’s rules so as to ensure information is accurate. When done correctly, a Wikipedia article is a win for both the encyclopedia and companies.

1 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015 LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH As part of its research into online corporate CONTENTS information, the Lundquist Wikipedia Research covers the article content of major corporations. THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN The latest research programmes look at: WIKIPEDIA AND COMPANIES • Wikipedia’s English language coverage of Europe’s top largest 100 companies (based on the FT500 index) European Edition p. 3 • The Italian language coverage of Italy’s top 100 companies • The English language coverage of the German DAX 30 1. Calling all editors p. 4 • The English language coverage of 48 Swiss listed companies 2. What we found out p. 5 3. Beware of the quick fix p. 6 RESEARCH FAST FACTS 4. Getting it right p. 9 Years running INSIGHT FROM WIKIMEDIA p. 10 4 Criteria Parts of the protocol: COUNTRY FOCUS Infobox, Features, Sections, Conversation Italy p. 14 & Acknowledgements Germany p. 21 Maximum score Switzerland p. 26

European 43 Swiss average score average score HOW WE CONDUCTED German 4 Italian p. 32 average score average score THE RESEARCH

HOW WE CAN HELP & CONTACTS p. 33

For more information and to order a report please contact: DANIELE RIGHI Head of the Lundquist Wikipedia Research [email protected]

2 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN WIKIPEDIA AND COMPANIES

Wikipedia has been losing active editors for close to a decade while the majority of articles about companies on the encyclopedia remain weak. Here are the pitfalls to reaching for the quick fix and some tips for standing tall.

VIOLATE 1/5 WIKIPEDIA RULES 1. CALLING ALL EDITORS 3. BEWARE OF THE QUICK FIX The number of active Wikipedia editors is dwindling, which Often companies, armed with the knowledge that the means fewer eyes and hands to update and improve the Wikipedia pages about them are inadequate and that encyclopedia’s pages. Therefore, information such as key the encyclopedia appears high in internet search results, financial data, historical notes and information on top succumb to the temptation to intervene directly to edit management, can be incomplete or prone to inaccuracy. their dedicated articles. We easily uncovered by a simple check a selection of 21 companies violating Wikipedia 2. POOR QUALITY OF PAGES (RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH) rules (whether by choosing a promotional name or directly Based on our screening of 29 criteria for a comprehensive intervening), which can expose them to reputational company article, which take into account what Wikipedia consequences including negative media coverage. recommends, the Lundquist Wikipedia Research 4. GETTING IT RIGHT revealed that companies 100 Since the research first launched in 2008, Lundquist’s averaged 65% of the total guidelines are helping companies understand and EUROPEAN COMPANIES score, compared with implement the correct procedures of engagement ASSESSED 66% in the last edition with the Wikipedia community. This allows companies of the research. which meet Wikipedia’s eligibility criteria to contribute transparently to improving their dedicated articles. The body of the Wikipedia article is usually the least complete section, with half of the largest 100 European companies (based on the FT500 index) dedicated articles scoring below 50% of the total score. One in five pages Wikipedia is an important player when shows an alert signaling an issue with the page (such as it comes to a company’s reputation, non-neutrality or a lack of references meaning the content yet its internal mechanism has is not verifiable as required by Wikipedia). Furthermore, been weakening over the last years the number of company articles with updated financial with the decline of active editors. figures has decreased by 27% since 2014. UBS obtained Furthermore, company articles are the top score followed by BP, BT Group and Enel. missing information. It is important for companies to engage constructively DECREASE IN with the online encyclopedia, in order -27% FINANCIAL FIGURES to ensure information is accurate.

Joakim Lundquist, Founder of Lundquist UBS BP BT GROUP ENEL

3 5th billion 60 MOST VISITED SITE ON THE WEB PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH OF THE TIME (English Wikipedia) WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE

3 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 1. Calling all editors

WIKIPEDIA PAGEVIEWS ARE MASSIVE Wikipedia pageviews grew on average by about 10% since 2010, totalling more than 9 billion in April 2015 (the metric used to assess pageviews has changed The major challenge for Wikipedia is since then with the aim to filter bot traffic, resulting the editing. It is in danger of imploding in 20% less pageviews: 8+ billion in March 2017). and the complexity of the issues it deals with is not going to get any easier. BUT SOMETHING’SDespite the WRONG visibility afforded to company articles on DespiteWikipedia, the visibility corporate afforded related to contentscompany on articles the encyclopedia Charlie Beckett, Director of POLIS, on Wikipedia,are suffering. corporate In fact, related our research contents show on that, the for instance, London School of Economics and Political Science’s journalism encyclopediathe number are ofsuffering. company Inentries fact, withthe numberupdated financialof think tank, in an interview with Lundquist for this research figures decreased by 27% since 2014. company articles in which financial data are missing or are outdated is on the rise (13% in 2014, 31% in 2015).

Wikipedia relies on voluntary editors, who ensure content is regularly updated and reliable from a quality standpoint, and their numbers are dwindling.

Very active editors (who edit content on Wikipedia a minimum of 100 times per month) have been decreasing over the last seven years with data showing there were only 3,367 in February 2017. Very active editors make up 0.01% of Wikipedia’s almost 31 million registered users (some people could have created multiple usernames over time, however the percentage is still staggeringly low). They are followed by 30,610 active editors (those who edit content on Wikipedia at least 5 times per month), representing only 0.1% of registered users.

There is roughly 1 active editor for every 170 Wikipedia articles in English. This dearth of active editors starts from the lowest rung: only 3.7% of the almost 31 million registered users became “contributors” as of February 2017 (meaning they have reached the threshold of at least 10 edits on the encyclopedia since they arrived).

This trend is also having an impact on articles about companies.

DECREASING NUMBER OF ACTIVE AND VERY ACTIVE EDITORS ON THE ENGLISH WIKIPEDIA

50.000 Active editors (5+ edits) 45.000 Very active editors (100+ edits) 40.000 35.000 30.000 25.000 20.000 15.000 10.000 5.000 0 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Source:Wikimedia

4 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 European Edition 2.What we found out Our research shows that Wikipedia articles about companies have issues and, compared to last year, less information. This page illustrates the main elements of a Wikipedia article about a company, along with some of the key research findings.

Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. This is where issues emerge and debates take In 2015, of articles place. of articles have This icon identifies a good have at least an alert discussions about content that article: complete, neutral, which indicates an issue is considered problematic by elegant, verifiable and with the page. the editors' community. illustrated. UBS’s article, which tops our ranking, is a prime example.

Article Talk Read Edit View history Search

COMPANY NAME

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ALERT

INFOBOX

On Wikipedia, basic information Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents is provided in this small box called: or lack of references). As you can see in the screenshot (“August 2009”), alerts can infobox. remain on the page for a very long time.

Only of articles In 2015, of articles PAGE SECTION obtained the complete infobox have at least an overview Here is where companies’ related contents are. (10−15 sentences). However, score including financial of entries do not have History section figures and key people. 3 this section updated. The history section is among the most prevalent in articles about companies. Historical information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of an article. The number of articles in which financial figures of articles present Criticism & litigation are missing or are outdated information on criticism is on the rise. and litigation. Criticism & litigation is a key section as it contributes to the neutrality of the entire page. Here the best role for the company is to double check information. (3 in 2014, 3 in 2015) Corporate Governance Dedicated articles on key people In 2015, of articles Information about Directors and Executives, which Wikipedia’s guidelines recommend, is less and less present on company articles. linked from the articles are on the presented the name of their rise: Directors or Executives, down from in 2014. articles about Chairmen in 2015 43 Vs in 2014; REFERENCES 4 All material on Wikipedia, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must articles about CEOs in 2015 be verifiable. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be 3 removed. Vs in 2014

PICTURES

have up to 20 sources of articles have Providing pictures is an opportunity for companies to bring (the more the better). more than 20. value to Wikipedia, starting on their path to becoming good Wikipedia contributors.

3 of articles present more than 2.

5 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 3. Beware of the quick fix

Often companies intervene without understanding the > One fifth of companies assessed are on Wikipedia rules of engagement by which Wikipedia operates. with an account (sometimes even two) containing only the name of the company, therefore they have violated We uncovered many accounts (in fact, 1/3 of the the username policy of Wikipedia (which bans both companies assessed) involved in the editing process. usernames implying shared use and promotional ones).

> 15 company accounts have been admonished or blocked for having published promotional information.

WHAT EUROPEAN COMPANIES DO WRONG

What a blocked account looks like on Wikipedia Maersk Line USA is an example of an account which was Editing from a neutral point means “representing fairly, blocked from editing and modifying content on Wikipedia proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of due to a conflict of interest. It has been identified by the significant views that have been published by reliable Wikipedia as an account set up for promotional purposes, sources on a topic.” See page “Wikipedia: Neutral Point of which goes against Wikipedia’s neutrality rule. View” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_ point_of_view).

The Maersk Line USA account was blocked because the name of the profile, coupled with the fact that it added a link to its Facebook page, was seen as an approach “mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purpose.”

6 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Risk of having your edit annulled The image below shows editing logs related to the article about Syngenta. The account SyngentaUK, likely connected to the global agricultural company, deleted controversial information. Due to its conflict of interest and the fact that this edit was not justified, it was reverted to the previous version by a Wikipedia editor who notified the user, SyngentaUK.

WHAT EUROPEAN COMPANIES DO RIGHT

How to introduce yourself correctly on Wikipedia User Arturo, working for BP, and user Cornelia Te, working for Nestlé, are two good examples of how individuals working for companies can introduce themselves on Wikipedia. The first step to being transparent is admitting a conflict of interest.

7 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 How to propose an edit to an article on Wikipedia This example explains how to correctly propose an edit for an article by asking for the community’s opinion.

8 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 4. Getting it right Four things companies should be doing when approaching Wikipedia

Understanding Wikipedia’s rules, and working alongside the Wikipedia community, is vital as it allows companies It is important for companies to to contribute correctly and avoid negative backlashes. understand that Wikipedia is not a Lundquist, since it first launched in 2008, has come up social network, nor is it an extension of with a set of guidelines to help companies understand their corporate website. Wikipedia is an the right procedures of engagement with the Wikipedia encyclopedia run by volunteers, who are community, allowing those which meet Wikipedia’s understandably proud of their work. eligibility criteria to contribute with transparency to the accuracy of corporate content in their company articles. Andrea Zanni, President of Wikimedia Italia (the non-profit organization that operates and manages Wikipedia) Lundquist Framework

DO NOT CONSIDER WIKIPEDIA A SUBSECTION OF THE DISCLOSE YOUR CONFLICT OF INTEREST 1 CORPORATE WEBSITE 2

> Wikipedia is an encyclopedia sustained by > Identify a representative who has to be clear a community of volunteer editors whose goal about who she is and what she is aiming to do is to bring educational content to the world > Register her conflict of interest via the community > Content is free for anyone to edit, use, modify and to ensure you are not violating the rules (“COI distribute (please note point 2 on conflict of interest) editing is strongly discouraged. It undermines the public’s confidence” source Wikipedia). > It is important to abide by the rules and learn how All editing activity remains visible on the site, to interact with the community. Every article on meaning violations are recorded permanently Wikipedia has to be written from a neutral point of view. Do not look at it as a form of “promotion”

Companies that are willing to correctly engage with the encyclopedia can transparently contribute in a beneficial way, starting from non- controversial and objective information. They can then evolve into trustworthy and respectful members of the community. Daniele Righi, Head of the Wikipedia Research

WIKIPEDIA IS A WEBSITE, NOT YOURS, NOT ANYONE ELSE’S. BRING VALUE TO WIKIPEDIA 3 THERE IS NO PRESS OFFICE NOR AN ARTICLE OWNER, 4 SO ENGAGE FIRST

> Engage with Wikipedia editors in the “talk” pages > Propose valuable, updated and sourced content first, to let them have their say about your proposals. Wikipedia is built upon the work of a community > Support the encyclopedia by helping to expand of editors who interact with each other as peers and improve articles, making sure to abide by the and strive for the perfect article. There are no rules. This will help ensure it becomes a better, undisputable experts on Wikipedia nor article owners more reliable source of information, a win-win nor managing editors, there are only conversations situation for both companies and Wikipedia

> One in five company-related entries contains an alert, a message which signals an issue with the content on the page: this is a good starting point for a company to understand what the main issues are

9 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 INSIGHT FROM WIKIMEDIA

LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH 2015 – EUROPE 100

Position Company Country Score 2015 Score difference To understand how the Wikipedia community views companies acting as contributors, we contacted Wikimedia, 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201 the non-profit organisation that operates and manages Wikipedia. Andrea Zanni, President of Wikimedia Italy, 1 UBS Switzerland 90.0% answered our questions 2 BP UK 88.0% 3 BT Group UK 86.0% 3 Enel Italy 86.0% 5 Airbus France 85.0% a. Dedicated company pages are often riddled with mistakes, Another way of bringing value to the encyclopedia would yet they are well positioned on search engines: We noticed that some be for companies to provide more information from the 6 Daimler Germany 84.0% fountain of knowledge they possess. This would entail, of the companies we analysed end up violating the rules when trying to 6 Deutsche Bank Germany 84.0% intervene through their own accounts. What is your opinion on this? for example, providing information on the market they operate in, other operators/products within this market, 6 Vodafone Group UK 84.0% information on the supply chain and the history behind this The Italian Wikipedia community [in line with the English 9 Danone France 83.0% one] has a specific policy formed of rules determined by market. 9 Gazprom Russia 83.0% the community that are pretty common sense and easy to follow. The Wikipedia community also retains it important that 9 Luxottica Italy 83.0% a company share their knowledge with the encyclopedia, 12 Volkswagen Germany 80.0% For the sake of convenience on both sides, it is worth a and do not use it as another marketing tool. company following these rules, so as to ensure that data 13 Statoil Norway 79.2% One final truism: it is not a “right” to have a Wikipedia and information is reliable. 14 Siemens Germany 78.8% company page. It must be “encyclopedic”; however this b. What are the most common errors that companies make? does not apply to every company. 15 Rio Tinto UK 78.4% What should they avoid doing when approaching Wikipedia, even if it is 16 Barclays UK 78.0% just to signal an error? Can you provide some advice? 16 Heineken Netherlands 78.0%

It is important for companies to understand that Wikipedia 16 Intesa Sanpaolo Italy 78.0% is not a social network, nor is it an extension of their 16 Royal Dutch Shell UK 78.0% corporate website. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia run by volunteers, who are understandably proud of their work. 20 Telefónica Germany 77.2% 21 Eni Italy 76.2% It would be interesting to see companies also using the 21 L'Oréal France 76.2% encyclopedia to go beyond proposing edits for articles about them, opening their archives and publishing digital 21 Orange France 76.2% materials that could have a historical significance, not 24 Société Générale France 76.0% just for the company itself, but also with regards to the historical period in which they were realized. 24 Total France 76.0% 26 BASF Germany 75.0% 27 Syngenta Switzerland 74.4% 28 Nestlé Switzerland 74.0% 28 Royal Bank Of Scotland UK 74.0% 30 BNP Paribas France 73.8% 31 Credit Suisse Group Switzerland 73.2% 32 Ericsson Sweden 72.0% 32 Lloyds Banking Group UK 72.0% 32 Unilever Netherlands 72.0% 35 Maersk Group Denmark 71.4% 35 Reckitt Benckiser UK 71.4% 37 GlaxoSmithKline UK 71.0% 37 SABMiller UK 71.0%

10 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH LUNDQUISTEUROPE WIKIPEDIA 100 RESEARCH 2015 – EUROPE 100

Position Company Country Score 2015 Score difference 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201

1 UBS Switzerland 90.0% 2 BP UK 88.0% 3 BT Group UK 86.0% 3 Enel Italy 86.0% 5 Airbus France 85.0% 6 Daimler Germany 84.0% 6 Deutsche Bank Germany 84.0% 6 Vodafone Group UK 84.0% 9 Danone France 83.0% 9 Gazprom Russia 83.0% 9 Luxottica Italy 83.0% 12 Volkswagen Germany 80.0% 13 Statoil Norway 79.2% 14 Siemens Germany 78.8% 15 Rio Tinto UK 78.4% 16 Barclays UK 78.0% 16 Heineken Netherlands 78.0% 16 Intesa Sanpaolo Italy 78.0% 16 Royal Dutch Shell UK 78.0% 20 Telefónica Germany 77.2% 21 Eni Italy 76.2% 21 L'Oréal France 76.2% 21 Orange France 76.2% 24 Société Générale France 76.0% 24 Total France 76.0% 26 BASF Germany 75.0% 27 Syngenta Switzerland 74.4% 28 Nestlé Switzerland 74.0% 28 Royal Bank Of Scotland UK 74.0% 30 BNP Paribas France 73.8% 31 Credit Suisse Group Switzerland 73.2% 32 Ericsson Sweden 72.0% 32 Lloyds Banking Group UK 72.0% 32 Unilever Netherlands 72.0% 35 Maersk Group Denmark 71.4% 35 Reckitt Benckiser UK 71.4% 37 GlaxoSmithKline UK 71.0% 37 SABMiller UK 71.0%

11 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Country Score 2015 Score difference 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201

39 H&M Sweden 70.8% 40 Allianz Germany 70.0% 40 AstraZeneca UK 70.0% 40 BHP Billiton UK 70.0% 40 BMW Germany 70.0% 40 HSBC UK 70.0% 45 EDF France 69.8% 46 Diageo UK 69.0% 46 Roche Switzerland 69.0% 48 RELX Group UK 68.0% 49 BG Group UK 67.0% 49 British American Tobacco UK 67.0% 51 ING Netherlands 66.2% 52 Prudential UK 66.0% 52 SAP Germany 66.0% 54 AXA France 65.8% 55 Imperial Tobacco UK 65.0% 55 Shire UK 65.0% 57 ABB Switzerland 64.2% 58 Henkel Germany 63.0% 58 Standard Chartered UK 63.0% 58 Telenor Norway 63.0% 61 Engie France 62.8% 62 Glencore UK 62.0% 63 Associated British Foods UK 60.0% 64 LVMH France 59.4% 64 Sano France 59.4% 66 Bayer Germany 59.2% 66 Novartis Switzerland 59.2% 68 Santander Spain 59.0% 69 Anheuser-Busch InBev Belgium 58.0% 70 Munich Re Germany 57.0% 70 National Grid UK 57.0% 72 Nordea Sweden 56.0% 72 Richemont Switzerland 56.0% 74 Christian Dior France 55.8% 75 Rosneft Russia 55.4% 76 Continental Germany 54.4% 77 Inditex Spain 54.2% 78 Zurich Insurance Group Switzerland 53.8% 79 Hermes International France 53.2% 79 Swiss Re Switzerland 53.2%

12 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Country Score 2015 Score difference Position Company Country Score 2015 Score difference 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201

39 H&M Sweden 70.8% 81 Atlas Copco Sweden 53.0% 40 Allianz Germany 70.0% 81 Swisscom Switzerland 53.0% 40 AstraZeneca UK 70.0% 83 Vinci France 52.8% 40 BHP Billiton UK 70.0% 84 Generali Group Italy 51.2% 40 BMW Germany 70.0% 84 Crédit Agricole France 51.2% 40 HSBC UK 70.0% 84 Deutsche Telekom Germany 51.2% 45 EDF France 69.8% 87 Lukoil Russia 50.8% 46 Diageo UK 69.0% 88 Novo Nordisk Denmark 50.2% 46 Roche Switzerland 69.0% 88 Vivendi France 50.2% 48 RELX Group UK 68.0% 90 Iberdrola Spain 49.2% 49 BG Group UK 67.0% 91 Linde Germany 49.0% 49 British American Tobacco UK 67.0% 92 Pernod Ricard France 48.8% 51 ING Netherlands 66.2% 93 UniCredit Italy 47.8% 52 Prudential UK 66.0% 94 ASML Holding Netherlands 46.0% 52 SAP Germany 66.0% 95 Deutsche Post Germany 45.0% 54 AXA France 65.8% 96 Air Liquide France 43.8% 55 Imperial Tobacco UK 65.0% 97 BBVA Spain 42.2% 55 Shire UK 65.0% 98 Schneider Electric France 39.0% 57 ABB Switzerland 64.2% 99 Investor Sweden 37.8% 58 Henkel Germany 63.0% 100 Fresenius Germany 35.8% 58 Standard Chartered UK 63.0% 58 Telenor Norway 63.0% 61 Engie France 62.8% To be noted: Only articles about companies in English have been evaluated 62 Glencore UK 62.0% 63 Associated British Foods UK 60.0% 64 LVMH France 59.4% 64 Sano France 59.4% 66 Bayer Germany 59.2% 66 Novartis Switzerland 59.2% 68 Santander Spain 59.0% 69 Anheuser-Busch InBev Belgium 58.0% 70 Munich Re Germany 57.0% 70 National Grid UK 57.0% 72 Nordea Sweden 56.0% 72 Richemont Switzerland 56.0% 74 Christian Dior France 55.8% 75 Rosneft Russia 55.4% 76 Continental Germany 54.4% 77 Inditex Spain 54.2% 78 Zurich Insurance Group Switzerland 53.8% 79 Hermes International France 53.2% 79 Swiss Re Switzerland 53.2%

13 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Country focus: ITALY THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN WIKIPEDIAWIKIPEDIA ANDAND ITALIANCOMPANIES COMPANIES

It’sWikipedia tough isgoing an important for Wikipedia’s player when coverage it comes of toItaly’s a company’s top 100 corporate companies. reputation, The Italian yet its editioninternal ofmechanism the Lundquist Wikipediahas been weakeningResearch 2015-2016over the last revealsyears with a shortagethe decline of of active editing editors frequency. and Furthermore,poor quality companyarticles, articlesmany “tainted” are withmissing alerts. information. This should It is important be a wake-up for companies call for to both engage editors constructively and companies with the online willing encyclopedia, to engage appropriately. in order to ensure information is accurate.

WHO’S WATCHING WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES? The article about Telecom Italia obtained the Wikipedia relies on voluntary editors to update and top score followed by Eni and Intesa Sanpaolo. improve content. The number of active Wikipedia The best improver article is the one dedicated to editors,1. DECREASING however, EDITORS is decreasing. This means fewer 2.Mediobanca POOR QUALITY followedOF COMPANY by PAGES Moncler and UBI Banca. eyesOne andof the hands major to updatetrends toand come improve out of information, the research this The research results reveal that companies averaged 65% whichyear isfor that this Wikipedia reason, is seems prone to beinaccuracy. weakening from ofAVOID the totalTHE DO-IT-YOURSELF score (25 points). APPROACH However, the content part is an editing standpoint. In fact, the number of active generallyArmed with the theless knowledgecomplete section, that the with Wikipedia half of pages the top about Theeditors, number who of frequently active editors edit andin Italy update has beeninformation decreasing 100them FT500 are companyinadequate related and that articles the encyclopediascoring below appears 50%. overon the the encyclopedia, last three years. is starting There wereto dwindle. only 2,473 Andrea active 20%high of in entries internet show search an alert, results, which companies signals an often issue succumb with editorsZanni, inpresident February of 2016, Wikimedia only Italia (the non-profit theto pagethe temptation (such as: lack to edit of neutrality, articles about lack themselves.of references aorganization tiny percentage that ofoperates more meaningWe easily that uncovered the content by a simple check 30 company LOREM IPSUM DOLOR thanand amanages million Wikipedia)registered 100 isaccounts, not verifiable 20 of and which so (67%) violate Wikipedia rules. SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR users.explained That to means us that there this is LoremLARGEST ITALIANipsum COMPANIES dolor sit forth).This might Furthermore, involve choosing the a promotional name or making is because the community number of company ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO roughly only 1 active editor amet,ASSESSED consectetur edits directly, which can expose them to reputational is shifting towards a more relatedconsequences entries hasincluding negative media coverage. for every 500 Wikipedia adipiscing elit, sed do LOREM IPSUM DOLOR qualitative, as opposed decreased by 27%. UBS has articles in Italian, meaning it iseiusmod a challenge tempor to have SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR to quantitative approach. both obtained 90% of the reliable, updated articles on Italianincididunt companies ut labore (see the et GETTING IT RIGHT ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO Nevertheless, this affects total score and the quality English-language Wikipedia-relateddolore data magna on page aliqua. 4). Since the research first launched in 2008, Lundquist’s many company articles pageguidelines status byare Wikipedia. helping companies understandLOREM IPSUMand DOLOR which are either missing It is followed by BP (88%) SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR ARTICLES ABOUT COMPANIES: ISSUESAndrea ARE FAR Zanni FROM BEING SOLVED implement the correct procedures of engagement with the ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO or presenting outdated President of Wikimedia Italia andWikipedia BT Group community. (86%). This allows companies to contribute Basedcorporate on our information screening of 29 criteria for a comprehensive transparently to improving their article,(such as we key found financial that articlesdata, about companies in Italian article (see more on page 9). arehistorical poor, averaging information less or than half of the total score. This criticaltop management). situation shows no improvement from last year. OF ARTICLES 39% HAVE ALERTS The3. WHAT body COMPANIES of the Wikipedia ARE DOING articleWRONG is usually the least 4. WHAT COMPANIES CAN DO completeThis trend, part, coupled with withmore the than fact 70% that of thecompany articles articles in on Lundquist, since the research first launched in 2008, Italian (dedicated to the 100 largest Italian companies) Wikipedia are highly exposed on search engines, results in has come up with a set ofTELECOM guidelines to help companies scoringsome companies below 50% intervening of the available to edit score. their Thirty-ninecompany articles understand the right procedures of engagement with the percentdirectly, ofwithout articles understanding show an alert the signaling rules of anengagement issue with Wikipedia community, allowingITALIA them to contribute with theby whichpage (such Wikipedia as non-neutrality operates. Often or lack times, of references, they end up transparency to theENI accuracy of corporateINTESA content in their meaningviolating the the content rules, which is not can verifiable expose themas required to reputational by company article. SANPAOLO Wikipedia).consequences, Seventy-five such as negative percent media of articles coverage. about companies that had at least one alert last year, still have one, meaning that the issue has not been dealt with. 3

6th 550 million MOST VISITED SITE IN ITALY PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH (Italian Wikipedia)

14 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 210 Italian Edition What we found out This page illustrates the main elements of a company Wikipedia article, along with some of the key research findings from the Italian edition.

This icon identifies a good article: complete, neutral, Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. elegant, verifiable and 3 of articles have discussions about content illustrated. that is considered problematic by the editors' An example is UBS’ article, Almost half of the articles community. have no discussion at all (no one which tops the EU ranking. have at least an alert proposing or discussing improvements): these Our study reveals that which indicates an issue entries have a very low score, meaning they need there are no “good with the page attention. articles” among the 100 largest Italian companies.

Article Talk Read Edit View history Search

COMPANY NAME

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ALERT Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents or lack of references). INFOBOX

On Wikipedia, basic information is provided in this small box called: infobox.

Only 4 articles obtained the complete infobox score of articles PAGE SECTION have at least an overview. Here is where companies’ related contents are. including financial figures and key people: However, do not History section Enel, Eni, Mediobanca and have this section updated. Telecom Italia. The history section is among the most prevalent in company articles. Historical information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of a company article.

Articles with missing or of articles Criticism & litigation outdated financial figures do not present information Criticism & litigation-related information contributes to the neutrality of the entire page. are on the rise. on criticism and litigation. Here the best role for the company is to double check information. (3 in 2014, in 2015) Corporate Governance

In 2015, of articles Information about Directors and Executives, which Wikipedia’s guidelines 34 recommend, is less and less present on company articles. present the name of their Directors or Executives, down from 44 in 2014. REFERENCES PICTURES All material on Wikipedia, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. Providing pictures is an opportunity for companies to bring value to Wikipedia, starting on their path to becoming good Wikipedia contributors.

20 sources of articles have Only of articles or less more than 20. present more than pictures. have no references meaning that content may be removed or considered ineligible for the encyclopedia, therefore potentially removable. In general, the more sources the better.

15 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Avoid the do-it-yourself approach

Often companies intervene without understanding the > 12 of the companies assessed are on Wikipedia with rules of engagement by which Wikipedia operates. an account (some have multiple accounts) containing only the name of the company, therefore they have violated We uncovered many accounts attributable to 30% of the the username policy of Wikipedia (which bans both companies assessed, involved in the editing process. usernames implying shared use and promotional ones).

> 18 company accounts have been admonished or blocked for having published promotional information.

> 9 company accounts use the correct approach.

WHAT COMPANIES DO WRONG

Contravening neutrality rule Editing from a neutral point means “representing fairly, The image below shows a warning addressed to ENAV’s proportionately, and, as far as possible, without bias, all of company fans or employees who have been admonished the significant views that have been published by reliable for having tried to add promotional content to the article. sources on a topic.” See page “Wikipedia: Neutral Point of Remember that content on Wikipedia should be written View” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_ from a neutral point of view. point_of_view).

Below is an example of how a company should not engage on Wikipedia. The A2A press office stepped into the discussion without taking into account what other editors were discussing before and, more importantly, was willing to edit the article without asking for any advice from other editors. The company had a direct conflict of interest when dealing with self-related content. Wikipedia requires companies not to intervene directly in order to preserve the neutrality of the encyclopedia.

16 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 WHAT ITALIAN COMPANIES ARE DOING RIGHT

How to introduce yourself correctly on Wikipedia User Aski72 working for Telecom Italia, Alessandra Bardo working for Terna and Antonio Ambrosio working for Pirelli are good examples of how individuals working for companies can introduce themselves on Wikipedia. The first step to being transparent is admitting a conflict of interest. See more on the importance of collaboration between companies and Wikipedia on page 8 and insights from Wikimedia on page 10

Read more on page 9 (“Getting it right”) about how to engage properly with the Wikipedia community to improve the entry on your company.

17 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Score 2015 Score difference LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH 2015 name (ma 25) compared to 201 LUNDQUISTITALY WIKIPEDIA 100 RESEARCH 2015 – EUROPE 100 41 OVS 49.4% 42 Atlantia 49.2% Position Company Score 2016 Score difference 43 ERG 49.0% 2016 name (ma 25) compared to 201 44 Ferrero 48.4% 1 Telecom Italia 94.0% 44 Reale Mutua 48.4% 2 Eni 84.0% 51 STMicroelectronics 46.0% 3 Intesa Sanpaolo 82.8% 46 Italcementi 47.8% 4 Rai 80.2% 47 ILVA 47.0% 5 Edison 78.0% 47 Prysmian 47.0% 6 Mediaset 77.0% 47 SACE 47.0% 7 Enel 74.0% 50 Barilla 46.4% 8 ENAV 73.7% 52 Dolce & Gabbana 45.0% 9 Poste Italiane 73.2% 53 Generali 43.4% 10 Banca Popolare di Milano 72.8% 54 CNH Industrial 43.0% 11 Mondadori 72.0% 54 Eataly 43.0% 12 Ansaldo STS 70.0% 54 Illy 43.0% 13 Ferrovie dello Stato 69.7% 54 Unipol Gruppo Finanziario 43.0% 14 Rcs MediaGroup 67.8% 58 Versace 42.4% 15 Terna 67.0% 59 Enel Green Power 42.0% 16 Salini Impregilo 65.0% 60 Armani 41.8% 17 Banca Monte dei Paschi Siena 64.4% 60 Yoox Net-A-Porter Group 41.8% 18 Finmeccanica 64.0% 62 Brembo 40.0% 18 Mediobanca 64.0% 62 SIA 40.0% 20 Alitalia 61.6% 64 Avio 39.4% 21 Coop Italia 60.0% 65 Banca IFIS 39.0% 22 Anas 59.6% 66 Piaggio Group 38.0% 23 Pirelli 59.2% 67 Menarini Group 37.4% 24 UniCredit 58.0% 68 DiaSorin 37.0% 25 Saipem 57.4% 68 Moleskine 37.0% 26 Ferrari 56.8% 70 Astaldi 36.8% 27 Snam 56.0% 71 Banca Popolare di Vicenza 36.0% 27 UBI Banca 56.0% 72 Bracco 35.4% 29 Esselunga 54.5% 73 Banca Generali 35.0% 30 Hera 53.0% 74 Perfetti Van Melle 34.4% 31 Davide Campari 52.8% 75 Sa lo 33.8% 32 Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) 52.0% 76 Acea 33.4% 33 Wind 51.5% 77 A2A 32.8% 34 Autogrill 51.4% 77 Mapei 32.8% 34 Luxottica 51.4% 79 GSE 32.4% 34 Parmalat 51.4% 80 Granarolo 32.2% 37 Marcegaglia 50.5% 81 Lavazza 31.8% 82 Salvatore Ferragamo 30.8% 83 BNL 30.0% 18 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Score 20152016 Score difference 20152016 name (ma 25) compared to 201

LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH 2015 – EUROPE 100 4138 OVSSky Italia 49.4%50.3% 4239 AtlantiaEXOR 49.2%50.0% Position Company Score 2016 Score difference 4339 ERGMoncler 49.0%50.0% 2016 name (ma 25) compared to 201 4441 FerreroOVS 48.4%49.4% 1 Telecom Italia 94.0% 4442 RealeAtlantia Mutua 48.4%49.2% 2 Eni 84.0% 5143 STMicroelectronicsERG 46.0%49.0% 3 Intesa Sanpaolo 82.8% 4644 ItalcementiFerrero 47.8%48.9% 4 Rai 80.2% 4744 ILVAReale Mutua 47.0%48.9% 5 Edison 78.0% 4746 PrysmianItalcementi 47.0%47.8% 6 Mediaset 77.0% 47 SACEILVA 47.0%47.5% 7 Enel 74.0% 5047 BarillaSACE 46.4%47.5% 8 ENAV 73.7% 5249 DolcePrysmian & Gabbana 45.0%47.0% 9 Poste Italiane 73.2% 5350 GeneraliBarilla 43.4%46.9% 10 Banca Popolare di Milano 72.8% 5451 CNHSTMicroelectronics Industrial 43.0%46.0% 11 Mondadori 72.0% 5452 EatalyDolce e Gabbana 43.0%45.5% 12 Ansaldo STS 70.0% 5453 IllyEataly 43.0%43.43% 13 Ferrovie dello Stato 69.7% 5453 UnipolIlly Gruppo Finanziario 43.0%43.43% 14 Rcs MediaGroup 67.8% 5855 VersaceGenerali 42.4%43.40% 15 Terna 67.0% 5956 EnelCNH GreenIndustrial Power 42.0%43.0% 16 Salini Impregilo 65.0% 6056 ArmaniUnipol Gruppo Finanziario 41.8%43.0% 17 Banca Monte dei Paschi Siena 64.4% 6058 YooxVersace Net-A-Porter Group 41.8%42.8% 18 Finmeccanica 64.0% 6259 BremboArmani 40.0%42.2% 18 Mediobanca 64.0% 6260 SIAEnel Green Power 40.0%42.0% 20 Alitalia 61.6% 6461 AvioYoox Net-A-Porter 39.4%41.8% 21 Coop Italia 60.0% 6562 BancaSIA IFIS 39.0%40.4% 22 Anas 59.6% 6663 PiaggioBrembo Group 38.0%40.0% 23 Pirelli 59.2% 6764 MenariniAvio Group 37.4%39.8% 24 UniCredit 58.0% 6865 DiaSorinBanca IFIS 37.0%39.0% 25 Saipem 57.4% 6866 MoleskinePiaggio 37.0%38.0% 26 Ferrari 56.8% 7067 AstaldiMenarini 36.8%37.8% 27 Snam 56.0% 7168 BancaDiaSorin Popolare di Vicenza 36.0%37.0% 27 UBI Banca 56.0% 7268 BraccoMoleskine 35.4%37.0% 29 Esselunga 54.5% 7370 BancaAstaldi Generali 35.0%36.8% 30 Hera 53.0% 7471 PerfettiBanca Popolare Van Melle di Vicenza 34.4%36.4% 31 Davide Campari 52.8% 7572 Sa loBracco 33.8%35.8% 32 Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) 52.0% 7673 AceaBanca Generali 33.4%35.0% 33 Wind 51.5% 7774 A2APerfetti Van Melle 32.8%34.7% 34 Autogrill 51.4% 7775 MapeiSa lo 32.8%33.8% 34 Luxottica 51.4% 7976 GSEAcea 32.4%33.4% 34 Parmalat 51.4% 8077 GranaroloMapei 32.2%33.1% 37 Marcegaglia 50.5% 8178 LavazzaA2A 31.8%32.8% 8279 SalvatoreGSE Ferragamo 30.8%32.7% 83 BNL 30.0% 19 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Score 20162015 Score difference 20162015 name (ma 25) compared to 201

8041 GranaroloOVS 32.5%49.4% 8142 LavazzaAtlantia 32.1%49.2% 8243 SalvatoreERG Ferragamo 30.8%49.0% 8344 BNLFerrero 30.3%48.4% 8344 CalzedoniaReale Mutua 30.3%48.4% 8551 ArtsanaSTMicroelectronics 30.1%46.0% 8646 AmplifonItalcementi 29.4%47.8% 8647 MaireILVA Tecnimont 29.4%47.0% 8847 GruppoPrysmian api 28.7%47.0% 8947 UnipolSaiSACE Assicurazioni 28.0%47.0% 9050 ReplyBarilla 27.4%46.4% 9152 BirraDolce Peroni & Gabbana 27.3%45.0% 9253 BancoGenerali Popolare 27.0%43.4% 9354 TenarisCNH Industrial 24.8%43.0% 9454 BancaEataly Mediolanum 23.0%43.0% 9554 AzimutIlly Holding 22.8%43.0% 9654 VenetoUnipol GruppoBanca Finanziario 22.2%43.0% 9758 TechnogymVersace 21.6%42.4% 9859 SisalEnel Green Power 21.2%42.0% 9960 DatalogicArmani 20.8%41.8% 10060 BrunelloYoox Net-A-Porter Cucinelli Group 17.0%41.8% 62 Brembo 40.0% To be noted: Only articles about companies in Italian have been evaluated 62 SIA 40.0% 64 Avio 39.4% 65 Banca IFIS 39.0% 66 Piaggio Group 38.0% 67 Menarini Group 37.4% 68 DiaSorin 37.0% 68 Moleskine 37.0% 70 Astaldi 36.8% 71 Banca Popolare di Vicenza 36.0% 72 Bracco 35.4% 73 Banca Generali 35.0% 74 Perfetti Van Melle 34.4% 75 Sa lo 33.8% 76 Acea 33.4% 77 A2A 32.8% 77 Mapei 32.8% 79 GSE 32.4% 80 Granarolo 32.2% 81 Lavazza 31.8% 82 Salvatore Ferragamo 30.8% 83 BNL 30.0% 20 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Score 20162015 Score difference Country focus: GERMANY 20162015 name (ma 25) compared to 201

8041 GranaroloOVS 32.5%49.4% THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN 8142 LavazzaAtlantia 32.1%49.2% 8243 SalvatoreERG Ferragamo 30.8%49.0% WIKIPEDIAWIKIPEDIA ANDAND GERMANCOMPANIES COMPANIES 8344 BNLFerrero 30.3%48.4% 8344 CalzedoniaReale Mutua 30.3%48.4% GermanWikipedia companies is an important have a toughplayer whennut to it crack comes on to Wikipedia. a company’s The corporate German reputation,edition of yetthe its Lundquist internal mechanismWikipedia Research 8551 ArtsanaSTMicroelectronics 30.1%46.0% revealshas been that weakening articles about over them the last are years often with corrupted the decline by alertsof editing and frequency.dead links, Furthermore,making content company less reliable. articles Furthermore,are 8646 AmplifonItalcementi 29.4%47.8% Germanmissing companies information. find It isthemselves important in for a companiessomewhat topeculiar engage position. constructively Sometimes, with the in fact,online they encyclopedia, can be wrong in order even if they are right (see the “German case“ below). 8647 MaireILVA Tecnimont 29.4%47.0% to ensure information is accurate. 8847 GruppoPrysmian api 28.7%47.0% THE BIG SHORT - WHO’S KEEPING AN EYE ON WIKIPEDIA ARTICLES? THE GERMAN CASE - CAN COMPANIES HELP IMPROVE CONTENT? Wikipedia relies on voluntary editors to update and Companies generally try to improve content, often 8947 UnipolSaiSACE Assicurazioni 28.0%47.0% improve content. However, it faces a problem. Over the improperly. German companies are, however, in a unique 90 Reply 27.4% past four years, the decreasing number of active editors position. The German language Wikipedia, in fact, allows 50 Barilla 46.4% 1. DECREASING EDITORS 2. POOR QUALITY OF COMPANY PAGES (those who actively develop and edit content within the the creation of verified corporate editor accounts (i.e using 9152 BirraDolce Peroni & Gabbana 27.3%45.0% One of the major trends to come out of the research this The research results reveal that companies averaged 65% encyclopedia) now results in fewer eyes and hands to their company name) which is forbidden in the English year is that Wikipedia seems to be weakening from of the total score (25 points). However, the content part is 9253 BancoGenerali Popolare 27.0%43.4% update and improve information, thus prone to inaccuracy. language version (which allows personal names only). an editing standpoint. In fact, the number of active generally the less complete section, with half of the top Therefore, German corporate editor accounts operating in 9354 TenarisCNH Industrial 24.8%43.0% editors, who frequently edit and update information 100 FT500 company related articles scoring below 50%. Over the last year, pageviews within the English language the English language version run the risk of being blocked. on the encyclopedia, is starting to dwindle. Andrea 20% of entries show an alert, which signals an issue with 9454 BancaEataly Mediolanum 23.0%43.0% Wikipedia, have continued Zanni, president of Wikimedia Italia (the non-profit the page (such as: lack of neutrality, lack of references 95 Azimut Holding 22.8% to grow from 7.7 to 8.2 In fact, we easily uncovered by a simple check 16 company 54 Illy 43.0% organization that operates meaning that the content billion. There are now over accounts, 11 of which (69%) violate Wikipedia rules. 96 Veneto Banca 22.2% and manages Wikipedia) 30 is not verifiable and so LOREM IPSUM DOLOR 54 Unipol Gruppo Finanziario 43.0% 270,000 more articles. The This might involve choosing a promotional name (even the explained to us that this GERMAN COMPANIES forth). Furthermore, the SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR 9758 TechnogymVersace 21.6%42.4% number of active editors, Lorem ipsum dolor sit simple corporate name is considered as such) or making is because the community INCLUDED IN THE DAX 30 INDEX number of company ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO however, has been steadily amet, consectetur edits directly, which can expose them to reputational 9859 SisalEnel Green Power 21.2%42.0% is shifting towards a more related entries has decreasing since 2007, adipiscing elit, sed do consequences including negative media LOREMcoverage. IPSUM DOLOR qualitative, as opposed decreased by 27%. UBS has 9960 DatalogicArmani 20.8%41.8% only stabilising recently at abouteiusmod 30,000 (0.1% tempor of the 30+ SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR to quantitative approach. both obtained 90% of the million of registered users). Thisincididunt means there ut is roughlylabore 1et GETTING IT RIGHT ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO 10060 BrunelloYoox Net-A-Porter Cucinelli Group 17.0%41.8% Nevertheless, this affects total score and the quality active editor for every 180 Wikipediadolore articles magna in English. aliqua. Since the research first launched in 2008, Lundquist many company articles page status by Wikipedia. 62 Brembo 40.0% Monitoring that amount of pages is unthinkable, setting helps companies understand and implementLOREM the IPSUM DOLOR which are either missing It is followed by BP (88%) SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR 62 SIA 40.0% a challenging task in ensuring a mistakeAndrea Zanni is promptly fixed correct procedures of engagement with the Wikipedia or presenting outdated and BT Group (86%). ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO (see the English Wikipedia-relatedPresident data on of pageWikimedia 4). Italia community. This allows companies to contribute 64 Avio 39.4% corporate information transparently to improving their (such as key financial data, 65 Banca IFIS 39.0% ARTICLES: ALERTS AND DEAD LINKS MAKE CONTENT LESS RELIABLE article (see more on page 9). historical information or Based on our screening of 29 criteria for a 66 Piaggio Group 38.0% top management). comprehensive article, we found that articles TOP 3 highest scoring articles 67 Menarini Group 37.4% about German companies in English are troubled 68 DiaSorin 37.0% by3. WHATalerts COMPANIES and useless ARE sourcesDOING WRONG of content. 4. WHAT COMPANIES CAN DODEUTSCHE This trend, coupled with the fact that company articles on33% Lundquist, since the research first launched in 2008, 68 Moleskine 37.0% BANK DespiteWikipedia a medium-high are highly exposed average on obtained search engines, by the results inOF ARTICLEShas come up with a set of guidelines to help companies 70 Astaldi 36.8% sample score (58% of the total score), one in three HAVE ALERTS SIEMENS some companies intervening to edit their company articles understand the right procedures of engagementADIDAS with the articles shows an alert signalling an issue with the 71 Banca Popolare di Vicenza 36.0% directly, without understanding the rules of engagement Wikipedia community, allowing them to contribute with pageby which (such Wikipedia as non-neutrality operates. or Often lack oftimes, references, they end up transparency to the accuracy of corporate content in their 72 Bracco 35.4% meaningviolating the the content rules, which is not can verifiable expose themas required to reputational by company article. 3 73 Banca Generali 35.0% Wikipediaconsequences, and, assuch a consequence, as negative media could coverage. be deleted). 74 Perfetti Van Melle 34.4% In addition to this, on average 10% (in some cases The 3 lowest scoring articles 75 Sa lo 33.8% 25% or even 46%) of references are useless dead links, meaning content are not sourced anymore. 76 Acea 33.4% Deutsche Boerse - Fresenius Medical Care - Vonovia 77 A2A 32.8% 77 Mapei 32.8% 79 GSE 32.4% 80 Granarolo 32.2% th 1 billion 81 Lavazza 31.8% MOST VISITED SITE IN GERMANY PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH (German-language Wikipedia) 82 Salvatore Ferragamo 30.8% 83 BNL 30.0% 21 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 210 German Edition What we found out This page illustrates the main elements of a company Wikipedia article, along with some of the key research findings from the German edition. To be noted, none of the articles dedicated to the companies of the DAX 30 have been

acknowledged as a Wikipedia best practice. This icon identifies a good article: complete, neutral, elegant, verifiable and Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. illustrated. of articles (3) have discussions about content An example is UBS’ article, that is considered problematic by the editors' 3 have which tops the EU ranking. community. 4 (12 articles) have no discussion Our study reveals that at least an which at all over the last 2 years (meaning no one is there are no “good indicates an issue with proposing or discussing improvements). the page. articles” among the 30 German companies in our sample.

Article Talk Read Edit View history Search

COMPANY NAME

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ALERT Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents or lack of references). INFOBOX

On Wikipedia, basic information is provided in this small box called: infobox.

Only 4 articles obtained the complete infobox score of articles PAGE SECTION have at least an overview. Here is where companies’ related contents are. including financial figures and key people: Deutsche Bank, However, do not History section Munich Re, SAP and Siemens. have this section updated. The history section is among the most prevalent in company articles. Historical information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of a company article.

Criticism & litigation In 3 of articles (7 articles) do not present information financial figures are missing or on criticism and litigation. Criticism & litigation-related information contributes to the neutrality of the entire page. Here the best role for the company is to double check information. outdated.

Corporate Governance

Information about Directors and Executives, which Wikipedia’s guidelines recommend, is less and less present on company articles. 3 present the name of their Directors or Executives.

REFERENCES However, of these PICTURES top managers do not have a All material on Wikipedia, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be dedicated article. removed. Providing pictures is an opportunity for companies to bring It is not a given that top value to Wikipedia, starting on their path to becoming good Wikipedia managers have an article on contributors. Wikipedia, nor a right. It is however common practice, provided that there are of articles present or enough authoritative sources 3 3 ) in our 3 sample present less than 25 sources. This is a very low more pictures. to back up information about amount considering that ideally every piece of information their biographies. should be backed up by an authoritative source. Wikipedia welcomes companies willing to give their images to the On average of sources in every article assessed are encyclopedia (e.g historical dead links. It is therefore impossible to verify the images). information they support.

22 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 German Edition Understanding Wikipedia to avoid reputational backlashes Often German companies intervene without understanding the rules of engagement by which ikipediaW operates. This icon identifies a good We uncovered many accounts involved in the editing process. article: complete, neutral, elegant, verifiable and Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. illustrated. > Violation of the username policy > Sanctioned accounts of articles (3) have discussions about content 50% of the accounts identified are on Wikipedia 31% of the accounts identified have been admonished An example is UBS’ article, that is considered problematic by the editors' 3 have which tops the EU ranking. with either an account or multiple ones or blocked for having published promotional in formation, community. 4 (12 articles) have no discussion Our study reveals that containing only the name of the company. They namely facts written using a promotional tone. at least an which at all over the last 2 years (meaning no one is indicates an issue with there are no “good have therefore violated the username policy of proposing or discussing improvements). articles” among the 30 > Doing it well the page. Wikipedia which bans promotional usernames. German companies in our Only 25% of the accounts identified sample. use the correct approach.

Article Talk Read Edit View history Search THE GERMAN CASE: WHERE GERMAN COMPANIES NEED TO LOOK OUT COMPANY NAME From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Contravening username policy is easier for German companies ALERT The image below shows how the German language Wikipedia is different to the English one. The former allows verified Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents accounts, even if named after the company. The latter forbids this type of action and can even enforce it by blocking the INFOBOX or lack of references). account (due to the promotional tone of the name itself). As such, the best option is to focus on different approaches for On Wikipedia, basic information different Wikipedia language versions. is provided in this small box called: infobox. Jenny at Daimler Only 4 articles obtained the Corporate complete infobox score Communications of articles PAGE SECTION have at least an overview. Here is where companies’ related contents are. including financial figures and is verified in key people: Deutsche Bank, German and However, do not History section Munich Re, SAP and Siemens. have this section updated. blocked in English The history section is among the most prevalent in company articles. Historical due to regulation information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of a company article. discrepancies.

Criticism & litigation In 3 of articles (7 articles) do not present information financial figures are missing or on criticism and litigation. Criticism & litigation-related information contributes to the neutrality of the entire page. Here the best role for the company is to double check information. outdated.

Corporate Governance

Information about Directors and Executives, which Wikipedia’s guidelines recommend, is less and less present on company articles. 3 present the name of their Directors or Executives. Daimler’s account was originally called “Daimler Corp. Communications”. For this reason a Wikipedia editor asked However, of these REFERENCES PICTURES Daimler to choose an alternative name. Thus, “Daimler Corp. Communications” became “Jenny at Daimler Corporate top managers do not have a All material on Wikipedia, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be Communications”. However, it is currently blocked. In February Daimler tried to start a, still open, conversation on the dedicated article. removed. Providing pictures is an topic. In these cases keeping the tone of the conversion collaborative, respectful, friendly and proactive is key in solving opportunity for companies to bring It is not a given that top value to Wikipedia, starting on their the issue. path to becoming good Wikipedia managers have an article on contributors. Wikipedia, nor a right. It is however common practice, provided that there are of articles present or enough authoritative sources 3 3 ) in our 3 sample present less than 25 sources. This is a very low more pictures. to back up information about amount considering that ideally every piece of information their biographies. should be backed up by an authoritative source. Wikipedia welcomes companies willing to give their images to the On average of sources in every article assessed are encyclopedia (e.g historical dead links. It is therefore impossible to verify the images). information they support.

23 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 WHAT GERMAN COMPANIES ARE DOING RIGHT

How to introduce yourself correctly on Wikipedia User DeutscheBankJR and Anja (Deutsche Post DHL) are good examples of how individuals working for companies can introduce themselves on Wikipedia. The first step to being transparent is admitting a conflict of interest.

See more on the importance of collaboration between companies and Wikipedia on page 8 and insights from Wikimedia on page 10.

Anja (Deutsche Post DHL) represents a very good example of an account who also adds a message when she (even if temporarily) stops contributing to Wikipedia.

Read more on page 9 (“Getting it right”) about how to engage properly with the Wikipedia community to improve the entry on your company.

24 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH LUNDQUISTLISTED WIKIPEDIA GERMAN RESEARCH 2015 – COMPANIESEUROPE 100

Position Company Score 201 201 name (ma 25)

1 Deutsche Bank 86.0% 2 Siemens 82.0% 3 Adidas 76.8% 4 Daimler 75.0% 4 SAP 75.0% 6 BMW 71.0% 6 Henkel 71.0% 8 Deutsche Lufthansa 70.0% 9 Allianz 69.2% 10 E.ON 63.0% 10 BASF 63.0% 10 Thyssenkrupp 63.0% 13 Volkswagen Group 62.6% 14 Bayer 60.6% 14 Merck 60.6% 16 In neon Technologies 57.6% 17 ProSiebenSat.1 Media 55.0% 18 Beiersdorf 54.0% 19 RWE 52.8% 20 Continental 52.5% 21 Fresenius 50.0% 22 Linde 49.5% 23 HeidelbergCement 47.0% 23 Munich Re 47.0% 25 Deutsche Telekom 45.0% 26 Deutsche Post 44.2% 27 Commerzbank 43.0% 28 Deutsche Boerse 42.0% 29 Fresenius Medical Care 29.8% 30 Vonovia 10.0%

To be noted: Only articles about companies in English have been evaluated

25 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Country focus: SWITZERLAND THE STATE OF PLAY BETWEEN WIKIPEDIA AND SWISS COMPANIES WIKIPEDIAWIKIPEDIA AND AND COMPANIES COMPANIES Wikipedia articles on listed Swiss companies are far from exhaustive but the response of many businesses is wrong and risky, Lundquist’s WikipediaWikipediaWikipedia Research is is2015-2016 an an important important reveals. player player when when it it comes comes to to a acompany’s company’s corporate corporate reputation, reputation, yet yet its its internal internal mechanism mechanism Our analysis brings to light that four out of five of thehas has companies been been weakening weakening that we over over found the the last arelast years engagingyears with with the on the decline Wikipediadecline of of editing editing frequency. frequency. Furthermore, Furthermore, company company articles articles are are have violated rules. This is counter-productive and shouldmissingmissing prompt information. information. a call It It foris is important importanta renewed for for companies commitmentcompanies to to engage engagein constructively constructively with with the the online online encyclopedia, encyclopedia, in in order order understanding how the free encyclopaedia works with the aimtoto ofensure ensure contributing information information appropriately. is is accurate. accurate.

ACTIVE EDITORS MISSING “EVERYWHERE” content is not verifiable as out COMPANIES THAT WE FOUND Wikipedia relies on voluntary editors to update and required by Wikipedia). of 4 5 ARE ENGAGING ON improve content. The number of active Wikipedia 1.1. DECREASING DECREASING EDITORS EDITORS WIKIPEDIA HAVE VIOLATED RULES 2.2. POOR POOR QUALITY QUALITY OF OF COMPANY COMPANY PAGES PAGES editors, however, is decreasing. This means fewer The article about One of the major trends to come out of the research this The research results reveal that companies averaged 65% eyes and hands to update and improve information, OneUBS of obtained the major the trends overall to score come followed out of the by researchthe this The research results reveal that companies averaged 65% year is that Wikipedia seems to be weakening from of the total score (25 points). However, the content part is which for this reason, is prone to inaccuracy. yearRoche is thatand NestléWikipedia articles. seems The to bestbe weakening improver from of the total score (25 points). However, the content part is an editing standpoint. In fact, the number of active generally the less complete section, with half of the top anarticle editing is the standpoint one dedicated. In fact, to theKuehne number + Nagel of active generally the less complete section, with half of the top editors,editors, who who frequently frequently edit edit and and update update information information 100100 FT500 FT500 company company related related articles articles scoring scoring below below 50%. 50%. As the European edition of the research reveals, active followed by Swisscom and Swiss Life. onon the the encyclopedia, encyclopedia, is is starting starting to to dwindle. dwindle. Andrea Andrea 20%20% of of entries entries show show an an alert, alert, which which signals signals an an issue issue with with editors are decreasing within the English-language Zanni,Zanni, president president of of Wikimedia Wikimedia Italia Italia (the (the non-profit non-profit thethe page page (such (such as: as: lack lack of of neutrality, neutrality, lack lack of of references references Wikipedia. This is also true, however, for both the SPOTTING THE “BAD GUYS”: organizationDOorganization SWISS COMPANIES that that operates operates BEHAVE ON WIKIPEDIA? meaningmeaning that that the the content content French and the German-language Wikipedia, which are and manages Wikipedia) is not verifiable and so LOREM IPSUM DOLOR andArmed manages with the Wikipedia) knowledge that the Wikipedia pages about is not verifiable and so LOREM IPSUM DOLOR key for Swiss companies. It turns out their numbers SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR explainedexplained to to us us that that this this forth).forth). Furthermore, Furthermore, the the SIT AMET, CONSECTETUR are only a tiny percentage of registered users. them are inadequate and that LoremtheLorem encyclopedia ipsum ipsum dolor dolorappears sit sit ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO isis because because the the community community numbernumber of of company company ADIPISCING ELIT, SED DO high in internet search results,amet, companiesamet, consectetur consectetur often succumb isis shifting shifting towards towards a amore more relatedrelated entries entries has has As of February 2016 active editors in the German- to the temptation to edit articlesadipiscingadipiscing about themselves. elit, elit, sed sed do do LOREMLOREM IPSUM IPSUM DOLOR DOLOR qualitative,qualitative, as as opposed opposed decreaseddecreased by by 27%. 27%. UBS UBS has has language Wikipedia were 6,207 while in the French- We easily uncovered by a simpleeiusmodeiusmod check 19 tempor temporcompany SITSIT AMET, AMET, CONSECTETUR CONSECTETUR toto quantitative quantitative approach. approach. bothboth obtained obtained 90% 90% of of the the language Wikipedia these were 4,606, compared with accounts,15 of which (79%) violateincididuntincididunt Wikipedia ut ut labore laborerules. et et ADIPISCINGADIPISCING ELIT, ELIT, SED SED DO DO Nevertheless,Nevertheless, this this affects affects totaltotal score score and and the the quality quality more than 2 million registered users in both cases. This might involve choosing a promotionaldoloredolore magna magna name aliqua. oraliqua. making manymany company company articles articles pagepage status status by by Wikipedia. Wikipedia. LOREM IPSUM DOLOR There is roughly only 1 active editor for every 300 edits directly, which can expose them to reputational LOREM IPSUM DOLOR whichwhich are are either either missing missing ItIt is is followed followed by by BP BP (88%) (88%) SITSIT AMET, AMET, CONSECTETUR CONSECTETUR Wikipedia articles in German and more than 370 consequences including negativeAndreaAndrea media Zanni Zanni coverage. or presenting outdated and BT Group (86%). ADIPISCINGADIPISCING ELIT, ELIT, SED SED DO DO or presenting outdated PresidentPresident of of Wikimedia Wikimedia Italia Italia and BT Group (86%). Wikipedia articles in French, meaning it’s a challenge corporate information corporatePercentages information are higher than in our European ranking: to have reliable, updated articles on Swiss companies. (such as key financial data, (such33% ofas Europeankey financial companies data, have at least an account historical information or historicaland 64% informationof these violate or rules (see page 6). ARTICLES ABOUT COMPANIES: top management). RESULTS REVEAL THE POOR QUALITY OF ARTICLES top management). Based on our screening of 29 criteria for a GETTING IT RIGHT comprehensive article, we found that articles about 3.Since3. WHAT WHAT theCOMPANIES COMPANIES research ARE ARE first DOING DOING launched WRONGWRONG in 2008, 4.4. WHAT WHAT COMPANIES COMPANIES CAN CAN DO DO Lundquist’s guidelines are helping companies Swiss companies in English are poor, averaging ThisThis trend, trend, coupled coupled with with the the fact fact that that company company articles articles on on Lundquist,Lundquist, since since the the research research first first launched launched in in 2008, 2008, understand and implement the correct procedures less than half of the total score. This critical WikipediaWikipedia are are highly highly exposed exposed on on search search engines, engines, results results in in hashas come come up up with with a aset set of of guidelines guidelines to to help help companies companies of engagement with the Wikipedia community. This situation shows no improvement from last year. somesome companies companies intervening intervening to to edit edit their their company company articles articles understandunderstand the the right right procedures procedures of of engagement engagement with with the the allows companies to contribute transparently in directly,directly, without without understanding understanding the the rules rules of of engagement engagement WikipediaWikipedia community, community, allowing allowing them them to to contribute contribute with with improving their articles (see more on page 9). The body of the Wikipedia byby which which Wikipedia Wikipedia operates. operates. Often Often times, times, they they end end up up transparencytransparency to to the the accuracy accuracy of of corporate corporate content content in in their their article is usually the least violatingviolating the the rules, rules, which which can can expose expose them them to to reputational reputational companycompany article article. . complete part, with almost AMONG 48 LISTED consequences,consequences, such such as as negative negativeUBS media media coverage. coverage. 80% of the articles (dedicated SWISS COMPANIES to the 48 listed Swiss ROCHE ASSESSED,3 DO NOT HAVE NESTLÉ companies assessed), scoring ANY DEDICATED ARTICLE below 50% of the available score. Three companies 3 out of 48 do not even have a dedicated article. Thirty- six percent of articles about companies either do not present financial data or present outdated information, up from 24% in 2014. Furthermore, one in four articles shows an alert signalling an issue with the page (such 65th6thth 550550 millionmillion as non-neutrality or lack of references meaning the MOST VISITED SITE IN SWITZERLAND MOSTMOST VISITED VISITED SITE SITE IN IN ITALY ITALY PAGEVIEWSPAGEVIEWS EACH EACH MONTH MONTH (Italian(Italian Wikipedia) Wikipedia) 26 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016

210210 Swiss Edition What we found out This page illustrates the main elements of a company Wikipedia article, along with some of the key research findings from the Swiss edition.

Talk page: the article's content is discussed here. This icon identifies a good 3 of articles have discussions about content article: complete, neutral, that is considered problematic by the editors' articles elegant, verifiable and has at least one alert community. have outdated or no discussion illustrated. which indicates an issue at all (no one recently proposing or discussing with the page improvements). An example is UBS’ article, which tops both the EU and Swiss ranking.

Article Talk Read Edit View history Search

COMPANY NAME

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

ALERT Editors can put an alert banner if an issue is spotted (such as promotional contents or lack of references). INFOBOX

On Wikipedia, basic information is provided in this small box called: infobox.

PAGE SECTION Articles with missing or of articles Here is where companies’ related contents are. outdated financial figures have at least an overview. are on the rise. History section 3 do not have this The history section is among the most prevalent in company articles. Historical ( in 2014, 3 in 2015) section updated. information contributes to justify the Wikipedia eligibility of a company article.

Criticism & litigation Only 4 companies analysed of articles do not Criticism & litigation is a key section as it contributes to the neutrality of the entire obtained the complete infobox present information page. Here the best role for the company is to double check information. score including financial figures on criticism and litigation. and key people: ABB, Adecco, Corporate Governance Nestlé and UBS.

Information about Directors and Executives, which Wikipedia’s guidelines recommend, is less and less present on company articles. Only of articles present the name of Directors or Executives. REFERENCES All material on Wikipedia, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable. Any material that needs a source but does not have one may be PICTURES removed.

Providing pictures is an opportunity for companies to bring value to Wikipedia, starting on their path to becoming good Wikipedia contributors.

have fewer than 20 3 of articles have sources more than 20 Only of articles present more than Only article (the one about Straumann) has no pictures. references, meaning that content may be removed or considered not notable for the encyclopedia, therefore potentially removable. An alert dating back to 2007 at the top of the page asks for “additional citations for verification” (see the box “Alert” at the top of this page) In general, the more sources the better.

27 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Spotting “bad guys“: do Swiss companies behave on Wikipedia?

Often companies intervene without understanding the > 11 companies assessed (24%) are on Wikipedia with rules of engagement by which Wikipedia operates. an account (some have multiple accounts) containing only the name of the company, therefore they have violated We uncovered many accounts attributable to the username policy of Wikipedia (which bans both more than 40% of the companies assessed, usernames implying shared use and promotional ones). involved in the editing process.

> 14 company accounts (31%) have been admonished or blocked for having published promotional information.

WHAT SWISS COMPANIES DO WRONG

Contravening neutrality rule Sgssm (editing exclusively the article about SGS) is an Editing from a neutral point of view means “representing example of an account which was blocked from editing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without content on Wikipedia due to a conflict of interest. It has bias, all of the significant views that have been published been identified by Wikipedia as an account set up for by reliable sources on a topic.” See page “Wikipedia: promotional purposes, which goes against Wikipedia’s Neutral Point of View” (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ neutrality rule. Wikipedia:Neutral_ point_of_view).

As the Sgssm account was also notified about the inappropriateness of its name, the account owner tried to ask for a new one repeatedly, without proposing a feasible option. Each time, the name proposed related to the company or was misleading (see below). The username policy bans promotional names (e.g. the name of a company) or usernames implying shared use.

28 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 WHAT SWISS COMPANIES DO RIGHT

How to introduce yourself correctly on Wikipedia User Fabienne Strobel working for Swiss Life is a good example of how individuals working for companies can introduce themselves on Wikipedia. The first step to being transparent is admitting a conflict of interest. See more on the importance of collaboration between companies and Wikipedia on page 8 and insights from Wikimedia on page 10.

WHAT COMPANIES IN GENERAL CAN DO BETTER

Read and understand first The image below shows ABB introducing the corporate communication team appropriately. However, the account violates the Wikipedia username policy because it is a promotional name and implies shared use. If you are willing to contribute to Wikipedia, it is important to spend some time understanding rules and procedures first.

Read more on page 9 (“Getting it right”) about how to engage properly with the Wikipedia community to improve the entry on your company.

29 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH LUNDQUISTLISTED WIKIPEDIA SWISS RESEARCH 2015 COMPANIES – EUROPE 100

Position Company Score 2016 Score difference 2016 name (ma 25) compared to 201

1 UBS 92.0% 2 Roche 73.0% 3 Nestlé 72.0% 4 Credit Suisse Group 71.2% 5 Syngenta 68.4% 6 ams 68.0% 7 Kuehne + Nagel 67.2% 8 Logitech 66.4% 9 ABB 64.0% 10 Swiss Life 63.0% 11 Swisscom 61.0% 11 Novartis 61.0% 13 Richemont 60.0% 14 Zurich Insurance Group 58.8% 15 Swiss Re 56.8% 16 Lindt & Sprüngli 52.0% 16 Schindler Group 52.0% 18 Transocean 48.0% 18 Sika 48.0% 20 Oerlikon 46.0% 20 Swatch group 46.0% 22 Geberit 45.0% 23 LafargeHolcim 43.0% 23 Givaudan 43.0% 25 SGS 41.0% 26 Julius Baer 39.2% 27 Sulzer 38.4% 28 Helvetia 36.4% 29 Adecco 36.0% 30 Barry callebaut 35.4% 31 Clariant 35.0% 32 Partners Group 33.0% 33 Baloise 32.8% 34 ARYZTA 31.4% 35 Dufry 30.4% 36 GF (Georg Fischer) 29.6% 37 Straumann 29.4%

30 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 Position Company Score 2016 Score difference 2016 name (ma 25) compared to 201

LUNDQUIST WIKIPEDIA RESEARCH 2015 – EUROPE 100 38 Lonza 29.2% 39 Actelion 27.8%

Position Company Score 2016 Score difference 40 Sonova 27.0% 2016 name (ma 25) compared to 201 41 Temenos 26.4%

1 UBS 92.0% 42 DKSH 26.0% 2 Roche 73.0% 43 GAM 21.6% 3 Nestlé 72.0% 44 Sunrise 20.4% 4 Credit Suisse Group 71.2% 45 Ems-Chemie 10.0% 5 Syngenta 68.4% 46 Galenica 0.0% 6 ams 68.0% 46 PSP Swiss Property 0.0% 7 Kuehne + Nagel 67.2% 46 Swiss Prime Site 0.0% 8 Logitech 66.4% 9 ABB 64.0% 10 Swiss Life 63.0% To be noted: Only articles about companies in English have been evaluated 11 Swisscom 61.0% 11 Novartis 61.0% 13 Richemont 60.0% 14 Zurich Insurance Group 58.8% 15 Swiss Re 56.8% 16 Lindt & Sprüngli 52.0% 16 Schindler Group 52.0% 18 Transocean 48.0% 18 Sika 48.0% 20 Oerlikon 46.0% 20 Swatch group 46.0% 22 Geberit 45.0% 23 LafargeHolcim 43.0% 23 Givaudan 43.0% 25 SGS 41.0% 26 Julius Baer 39.2% 27 Sulzer 38.4% 28 Helvetia 36.4% 29 Adecco 36.0% 30 Barry callebaut 35.4% 31 Clariant 35.0% 32 Partners Group 33.0% 33 Baloise 32.8% 34 ARYZTA 31.4% 35 Dufry 30.4% 36 GF (Georg Fischer) 29.6% 37 Straumann 29.4%

31 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 HOW WE CONDUCTED THE RESEARCH

Lundquist tracks how well Wikipedia presents major corporations as part of its research into online corporate information since 2008.

In the 2016 edition, the Wikipedia research evaluated the English-language articles about the 100 largest European companies - based on the FT500 index - (September 2015), the English-language articles about the 48 listed Swiss companies (January 2016), the Italian-language articles about the 100 largest Italian companies (November 2015) and the English-language articles about the 30 German companies included in the DAX 30 index (September 2016).

A four-part protocol of 29 criteria is used to allocate a maximum of 25 points for each Wikipedia article assessed. The criteria covers both article content and presentation. Verifying the accuracy of information in the Wikipedia articles was beyond the scope of the research.

The protocol has been also revised and extended to evaluate the way editors interact “behind the scenes” of every article. In selecting criteria we took into consideration content guidelines suggested by Wikipedia.

THE PROTOCOL IS STRUCTURED AS FOLLOWS Infobox Page features The first part of the protocol examines5th the content The second section looks at a range605th of features such 60 of the infobox, located on the right-hand side of a as categories billion that improve navigation through the billion Wikipedia company article. It coversMOST VISITED information SITE ON THE suchWEB as PAGEVIEWSencyclopedia, EACH MONTH pictures and referencesOFMOST THE VISITED TIME which SITE ON allow THE WEB PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH OF THE TIME (English Wikipedia) WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK (English Wikipedia) WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK the year of foundation, corporate logo, headquarters, users to verify information in the Wikipedia article. IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE financial figures, number of employees, and industry.

Page sections Conversations & acknowledgements The third part evaluates the information5th in the main body This year a new section was added5th that is dedicated to of the Wikipedia entry. The protocol takes into account how billionWikipedia actually takes shape60 and to how entries billion 60 many different themes, from companyMOST VISITED history SITE ON toTHE business, WEB PAGEVIEWSare judged EACH MONTHby the Wikipedia community.OFMOST THE VISITED TIME SITEThe ON research THE WEB PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH OF THE TIME WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK information on directors and executives, to criticism. (Englishlooked Wikipedia) at the conversations taking place around the (English Wikipedia) IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE entries. Every Wikipedia page has a talk page where editors can ask questions or discuss content to add, issues and controversial contents. This is where a better understanding can be reached on how the entry is evolving and who is involved in the editing process. A further point was assigned to entries whose quality was acknowledged by the Wikipedia community.

Penalty point In the latest version of the protocol up to 1.6 points can be deducted from the final score: 0.1 in the first section for entries that do not present updated information;5th 0.5 in the third section for entriesbillion showing an alert banner60 that signals an issue; -1 when there is a negative discussionMOST VISITEDin the SITE talk ON pages.THE WEB PAGEVIEWS EACH MONTH OF THE TIME (English Wikipedia) WIKIPEDIA RESULTS RANK IN THE FIRST PAGE OF GOOGLE

32 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016 HOW WE CAN HELP

ASSESSMENT, REPORT & TRAINING

We can support you:

• Access to our knowledge base including our protocol (with criteria) and best practices • A tailored analysis focused on the article about your company, including strengths and weaknesses (if the article already exists) • A feasibility analysis for a brand new stand-alone article (if the article does not exist) • Training on how to engage correctly and transparently with the Wikipedia community • Suggestions on updates, integration, and materials

We are candid in the advice we provide, and will suggest, if needed, to abstain from Wikipedia if certain activities do not comply with its rules.

For more information and to order a report, please contact:

DANIELE RIGHI JOAKIM LUNDQUIST Head of the Lundquist Wikipedia Research Founder of Lundquist [email protected] [email protected]

Lundquist is a strategic consultancy specialised in digital corporate communications.

We help our clients plan and build successful corporate websites that respond to the most demanding corporate audiences.

Our method: Measure. Manage. Change

We measure the effectiveness of digital communications in order to guide our clients towards a change in their internal culture.

With this approach we are able to help you at every stage of your digital journey.

33 - Lundquist Wikipedia Research 2015-2016