Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. I noticed the issue this morning and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about it.
http://pop.thousandrobots.com/2007/07/mediabistro_and_wikipedia.php
In short, MediaBistro.com, a media news site, offers a $15 video "course" on how to use Wikipedia to raise your media profile. The preview video raises the specter of the Seigenthaler controversy, and offers to "explains what Wikipedia is, how it works, and how people and businesses can increase and influence an identity on it".
two words...fucking capitalism.
On 7/19/07, admnyc admspam@yahoo.com wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. I noticed the issue this morning and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about it.
http://pop.thousandrobots.com/2007/07/mediabistro_and_wikipedia.php
In short, MediaBistro.com, a media news site, offers a $15 video "course" on how to use Wikipedia to raise your media profile. The preview video raises the specter of the Seigenthaler controversy, and offers to "explains what Wikipedia is, how it works, and how people and businesses can increase and influence an identity on it". -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/MediaBistro-advising-clients-to-edit-their-own-pages-o... Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
lol, as Jimbo often repeats "wikipedia is not an experiment in socialism". if I had $15 bucks spare i'd buy it. Wikipedia dominates google search and even a rejected spam site will still appear on google search because its appeared on this list, AN/I, Ea/R or requests for articles. We might have robot.txt and "no follow", but especially this list shouldn't be mirrored throughout the web. Wikipedia is open and the list archives are open within enwp. mirroring the list just defeats the whole lists goal, to make Wikipedia better. OK, the list isn't a chat room, but we all spiel things here that we wouldn't do on a talk page or AN/I.
mike
On 23/07/07, Steven Walling steven.walling@gmail.com wrote:
two words...fucking capitalism.
On 7/19/07, admnyc admspam@yahoo.com wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. I noticed the issue this morning and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about it.
http://pop.thousandrobots.com/2007/07/mediabistro_and_wikipedia.php
In short, MediaBistro.com, a media news site, offers a $15 video
"course"
on how to use Wikipedia to raise your media profile. The preview video
raises
the specter of the Seigenthaler controversy, and offers to "explains
what
Wikipedia is, how it works, and how people and businesses can increase
and
influence an identity on it".
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/MediaBistro-advising-clients-to-edit-their-own-pages-o...
Sent from the English Wikipedia mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On 7/19/07, admnyc admspam@yahoo.com wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. I noticed the issue this morning and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about it.
Someone will probably point you to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, [[WP:COIN]].
I haven't watched the video, but I personally don't have a problem with the idea. We're, collectively, way too touchy about conflicts of interest. If the folks behind Michael's or the Waverly Inn want to add articles on their restaurants to Wikipedia, I'm certainly not going to try and stop them. Worst case scenario, they'll write an overly positive article about a notable subject.
They're also probably right about proactive solutions to Seigenthalish problems. I haven't done a systemic study, but I've noticed that the better the article, the less vandalism it tends to get. Vandalism also tends to get caught and reverted faster on good articles because it stands out more.
-Chris Croy
On 7/24/07, C.J. Croy cjcroy@gmail.com wrote:
On 7/19/07, admnyc admspam@yahoo.com wrote:
Sorry if this is the wrong place for this. I noticed the issue this morning and was wondering if anyone had an opinion about it.
Someone will probably point you to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, [[WP:COIN]].
I haven't watched the video, but I personally don't have a problem with the idea. We're, collectively, way too touchy about conflicts of interest. If the folks behind Michael's or the Waverly Inn want to add articles on their restaurants to Wikipedia, I'm certainly not going to try and stop them. Worst case scenario, they'll write an overly positive article about a notable subject.
They're also probably right about proactive solutions to Seigenthalish problems. I haven't done a systemic study, but I've noticed that the better the article, the less vandalism it tends to get. Vandalism also tends to get caught and reverted faster on good articles because it stands out more.
-Chris Croy
Most articles wtih serious COIs are rather crappy. If someone knows of a good article with a COI, point it out to me. And people with COIs don't take kindly to suggestion they read WP:MOS, study English grammar, and allow people who can spell words in English to edit their, uh, prose. And, they own the crap, oh do they own the crap, and nothing else will make them see it.
But, yes, I guard the best articles I've contributed to more than the lesser ones. I think a lot of people do. And people with COIs can't see their own crap, and they don't really need to be doing a disservice to someone or thing just because they're connected.
KP
On 7/24/07, K P kpbotany@gmail.com wrote:
Most articles wtih serious COIs are rather crappy. If someone knows of a good article with a COI, point it out to me. And people with COIs don't take kindly to suggestion they read WP:MOS, study English grammar, and allow people who can spell words in English to edit their, uh, prose. And, they own the crap, oh do they own the crap, and nothing else will make them see it.
I believe [[Richard Hack]] is a pretty good start-class article. The current version is mostly the work of the subject. It probably helps that he's a professional writer.
-Chris Croy