<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>Wow - that's one damn long sentence! :-)</div><div><br></div><div>I agree entirely - this is what I was getting at with the idea of the "backstage tour". An organisation shows members of WM-Au around some part of its facilities that are not normally accessible and we then donate some time to improving their article (and teaching them how to improve articles on the topic that that organisation knows about). This would be a really tangible benefit of WM-Au membership.</div><div><br></div><div>To respond to Andrew Garrett's concern "Money and articles don't mix" - this does not mean "give us money and we will improve your article". Rather, those organisations that are interested in working with us (whether they are donors *or not*) can share their expertise and we share our expertise back - a win win. It is just more than likely that the organisation that wants to be a member is the same kind of organisation that wants to give us a backstage tour. </div><div><br></div><div>Under no circumstances would it be a situation where they pay to have access to our editing abilities/time. </div><div><br></div><div>-Liam</div><br><div><div>On 13/11/2008, at 10:05 PM, Confusing Manifestation wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">I'd also like to see some kind of system where organisations (not</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">necessarily donors) could help us improve their articles - as long as</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">it's made abundantly clear to them at the start that the aim is to get</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">a well-sourced, neutral article rather than a promotional puff piece,</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">it would still often be in their interests to help since it would</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">result in an article that at the very least won't be an attack page,</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">and by keeping everything out in the open at least means that there</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">will be constant scrutiny (rather than the standard pattern of someone</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">editing, and someone else identifying them as having a conflict of</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">interest, and the media exploding into a frenzy of "X edited an</font></p> <p style="margin: 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px 0.0px"><font face="Helvetica" size="5" style="font: 16.0px Helvetica">article on Y, shame on X!").</font></p> </blockquote></div><br></body></html>