On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 18:20, Nathan nawrich@gmail.com wrote:
The idea of verified accounts raises all sorts of questions and potential problems. The Wikimedia Foundation might be able to verify that users requesting a "company account" are connected to that company, if the account is on the English Wikipedia. But can the Foundation be sure that the existence of a company account is authorized by that company? Can they do anything at all in other languages? Should the process of "verification" be left to OTRS, or some other group on each wiki? If verified status is granted erroneously, and it impacts the reputation of a particular company, who is responsible?
Well, obviously the "verified" account system should find a way to answer those questions.
And I fail to see what kind of responsibility would end up on the shoulders of an administrator for blocking an account on Wikipedia. It's not like blocking a Wikipedia account actually endangered a company in any kind of way.
Among other reasons, the English Wikipedia bans role accounts (including corporate accounts) because we wish people to act on their own behalf, and not claim the support or backing of a corporation. With limited capacity to verify the basis for any claimed role, we end up treating all such claims as suspect anyway. This restriction may be inconvenient in some instances, but far more trouble is prevented by maintaining the simplicity of individual to individual interaction.
But as I understand it, accounts such as "Delphine-ACMEcola" are also blocked on sight right? Which prevents even me from making edits on behalf of a "company" and being really open about it.
Mind you, if I was there to really make a company shinier on Wikipedia (see the recent coffee brand case recently talked about in the French Wikipedia), I would probably avoid having a corporate account at all. But for people and companies who act in good faith, I still think that role accounts should be allowed and a verify-system be put in place.
Delphine