On 18 Nov 2010, at 15:42, Fred Bauder wrote:
On Thu, Nov
18, 2010 at 14:09, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 18 November 2010 11:30, Â <wiki-list(a)phizz.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Any one signed up yet?
>
http://www.ereleases.com/pr/visibility-wikipedia-easier-43135
I could find anything wrong in their code of ethics
http://www.wikipediaexperts.com/codeofethics.html
--
Amir E. Aharoni
Neither do I, which bodes problems for the business. They hire you to
break Wikipedia rules, not follow them. The question remains: is paid
editing which does conform to Wikipedia policies and guidelines
acceptable, even welcome?
What I worry about is the volunteer time that gets taken up tidying things up after
something like this goes wrong - or worse, goes somewhat right but not completely (so that
a simple revert is out of the question and a major cleanup of an article is needed, or a
lot of discussion with the editor is necessary to set things straight). That's
volunteer time that could otherwise be spent either productively, or tidying up after
other volunteers.
It almost leads into the catch-22 scenario where the paid editors need to guarantee that
if their work isn't up to scratch then they'll pay someone else to fix it...
Mike