xaosflux wrote:
Exatly, many corporations provide proxied Internet access to their staff. Any of their employee's who know about wikipedia are bound to come across their companies article and want to change it one way or the other. Some of these people may by nature of their occupation be subject matter experts on the article and related subjects, in the example below it could bring in [[beer]] or [[Brewing (beer)]] experts. If we want to come up with some sort of templated response to them it shouldn't be one that discourages them from editing so much as one that stresses the importance of [[WP:NPOV]] and [[WP:V]].
My aversion to templates aside, one always has to "beer" in mind that many of the most loyal employees of a company edit with an authority, eloquence and common sense that reminds one of a typical British football fan's support of his favourite team. The offerings of these employees may show considerable contrast from the company's public relations strategy. Companies that are reasonably cluefull about PR know to avoid certain losing strategies.
A brewmaster working for a major company may be in the best position to explain how his company distinguishes between the different styles of beer produced by the company. One should not presume a conflict of interest in a topic where there is no conflict at all in the first place. If a food manufacturing company claims a certain level of sodium in one of its products it is important to show that that is its claim and the source of that claim can be as ephemeral as the paper label on a can, but if independent testing shows a much higher level of sodium that should be reported too.
Any of these issues need to be approached with a more sophisticated analysis than has heretofore been the case. We could start scanning the labels on cans, and before anyone gets the idea that such an act would be copyright infringement, I would bring their attention to position in law that it is expression rather than fact and ideas that are copyright.
Ec
From: "David Gerard"
On 12/09/2007, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
Bear in mind that it's quite likely that many of these edits are not by people authorized to speak for the company, but rather by loyal employees without management sanction.
Yes. It's important to assume cluelessness rather than malice.
(Besides, if it weren't cluelessness, they'd be smart enough to create a login.)