Considering the purpose of wikidata, it might make sense for it to have
somewhat different rules also. Unlike Wikipedia, it is a directory
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:56 PM, James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:
The terms of use as explained on meta apply to all
projects unless an
alternative is in place. So sister projects do have similar restrictions on
undisclosed paid editing.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use#4._Refraining_from_Certain_
Activities
Different projects of course have varied degrees of enforcement of the TOU.
Italian WP did delete the article in question a couple of times
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvaTrade
James
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Gabriel Thullen <gabriel(a)thullen.com>
wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly with Vito. Thank you for
bringing up this issue.
Wikidata is part of the umbrella group of Wikimedia projects. Wikipedia
has
strict rules governing paid editing (at least in
EN), and these rules are
not even the same across different language editions.
Most of the other projects do not have such rules. Wikimedia Commons, for
example. Most of us know what product placement is. Do certain
contributors
earn their living from it? Why don't these
"sister" projects have similar
restrictions on paid contributions?
Gabe
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.wiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> We currently have some mean to fight paid editing, terms of services
are
"easy to violate" thus giving us a straightforward way to take action.
But
> too often I see something like:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ Q16826370
> obvious paid editors left totally free to do
their job without even
> attracting some attention on them.
>
> Vito
>
> 2017-04-23 13:58 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <
peter.southwood(a)telkomsa.net
>:
>
> > I would think this is up to the chapter/affilate organisation, but no
> harm
> > in getting a more universal collection of opinions.
> > Cheers,
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org]
On
Behalf Of Gabriel Thullen
Sent: Sunday, 23 April 2017 10:50 AM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing
companies
> that offer paid editing services
>
> I suggest another question, right after your #5. Undisclosed paid
editing
> > is one thing, dealing with disclosed paid editors within our
community
is
> > another. You could add the following question:
> > "Asking if we agree to let disclosed paid editors occupy key
positions
within the Wikimedia movement such as chapter board,
official chapter
spokesperson, affiliate organization board, etc."
On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:16 AM, James Salsman <jsalsman(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> > I've proposed asking wikimedians at large what they think should be
> > done about paid advocacy editing, as item number 5 on my periodic
> > survey proposal composed of all the unresolved questions over the
last
> > > quarter on this list at:
> > >
> > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#
> > > Periodic_survey_prototype
> > >
> > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:50 PM Pine W <wiki.pine(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> > > >
> > > > Has there been a recent substantial discussion by the community
> > > surrounding
> > > > promotional/biased editting paid or otherwise, which had an
> > > > outcome resulting in a specific request for assistance or
> > > > increased action by
> > the
> > > > WMF?
> > > >
> > >
> > > Aside from the conversation on this list, I'm aware of the
> > > discussion on Jimbo's talk page. If WMF Legal or the WMF Board
wants
> > > > to take the
> > > position
> > > > that it would like to see a community RfC or some other such
> > > > discussion,
> > > I
> > > > imagine that such can be arranged, and I can see how that might
be
> > > > beneficial. Of course, anyone
is free to initiate such an on-wiki
> > > > discussion.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If there hasn't, I do not see grounds for you to be
expecting
an
> > > official
> > > > > response from Legal to a list whose conversation has for the
most
> > > > > part consisted of about
6 people?
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure why you would be telling other people to whom they
can
> > > > initiate requests and the
conditions under which they can be
made.
I
> > > > already have a dim view of WMF's customer service; please
don't
dig
> > > > the hole any deeper.
> > > >
> > > > Many others, I am sure, would rightly complain if the Foundation
> > > > > unilaterally made decisions in this area.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That is possible if WMF were to do something particularly novel,
so
> > > > your sense of caution here is
well taken. I would hope that WMF
> > > > would discuss its plans with the community and have a
conversation
> >
> before actually initiating novel actions.
> > >
> > >
> > > > But please be realistic, this is
> > > > a coffee table discussion.
> > >
> > >
> > > I have mixed views on this. Wikimedia-l is not a quiet back room
> > > with
> > only
> > > a few people around, but it's true that a consensus here among a
> > > small number of people who speak up in a particular discussion
> > > demonstrates a lower level of consensus than an RfC with hundreds
of
> > > > participants. It's not clear to me that there is consensus on
which
> > > > tools are appropriate
> > > for
> > > > which exact circumstances, and some discussions happen in
multiple
> > > venues.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The views expressed here are valid but the right
> > > > >
> > > > thing to do would be to further the conversation on wiki and
have a
> > > proper
> > > > > community conversation.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't think that there is a single definition of a
"proper"
> > > > community conversation.
> > > >
> > > > I have no objection to having an on-wiki RfC (and I can see how a
> > > > sophisticated and well-attended one might produce detailed
guidance
> >
> that would be helpful), but neither do I want this thread to be
> trivialized.
> > >
> > > Pine
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe:
> > >
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> >
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> >
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
> > -----
> > No virus found in this message.
> > Checked by AVG -
www.avg.com
> > Version: 2016.0.8013 / Virus Database: 4769/14365 - Release Date:
> 04/23/17
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/ mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>