On 12/03/07, Steve Bennett <stevagewp(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/12/07, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> They don't stop and they won't stop.
I'm guessing here, you
> understand. But as has been pointed out before in this thread, the
> whole point of PR is POV-pushing; it's antithetical to Wikipedia.
1. Not all paid editing is PR. Do you agree?
Oh, definitely - I gave an example before, where institutes fund
someone to write articles in a language's Wikipedia.
But when a company pays someone to write articles about them, that's
PR however you slice it.
It would be nice for companies to fund people just writing stuff. I
suspect it would take an intermediary so the financial effect of not
writing nice things about the sponsor would be buffered suitably.
2. If people won't stop doing something if we ask
them to, then it
doesn't matter what rules we create for them. We can focus our
attention on people who do want to edit in good faith and work with
our community, rather than those who work against it.
I'm viewing this 'no paid editing' article as another way of phrasing
existing rules.