No. You underestimate their subtlety and professionalism.. See
Durova, at
http://searchengineland.com/seo-tips-tactics-from-a-wikipedia-insider-11715
. I am aware of editing by paid editing that is neither aggressive
nor inappropriate. Really good PR people can learn to be careful not
to express a POV when they know they are not supposed to.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Fred Bauder <fredbaud(a)fairpoint.net> wrote:
Obviously, the
ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect.
It is not so much that they cannot be detected, after all their editing
has purpose and they are usually both aggressive and persistent. However,
adequate demonstration of such patterns of activity to other
administrators, or ultimately, to a committee is not trivial.
The essential clue is that they have a strong point of view about
something that no ordinary person would be exercised about, some company
or product with public relations deficits.
Ultimately, pursuit of any but the most clumsy is hard thankless work.
Beating on the clumsy, is, of course, a necessary task if only to correct
bad editing.
Fred
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
--
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG