[WikiEN-l] More about PR firms

[Cheney Shill]

If it hasn't been suggested already and this is not simply PR'n on an easy target with the "very very strongly", subscribing this list to the PRwatch weekly spin summary would help to remind admins about what to look out for on a regular basis.  That would actually seem like very, very strong emphasis on the importance of this:
http://two.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/weekly-spin 

The entire month up until now:
http://www.prwatch.org/spin 


Jimmy Wales <jwales at wikia.com> wrote: 
I think we need to be very clear in a lot of different places that PR 
firms editing Wikipedia is something that we frown upon very very 
strongly.  The appearance of impropriety is so great that we should make 
it very very strongly clear to these firms that we do not approve of 
what they would like to do.

It is all well and good to say, well, it is ok so long as they remain 
neutral, but if they really want to write neutral articles, they can do 
so, on their own websites, and release the work under the FDL, and 
notify Wikipedians who are totally independent.

Additionally, it is always appropriate to interact on the talk pages of 
articles.  If a PR firm is not happy about how something is presented 
about their client, they can identify themselves openly on the talk 
page, and present well-reasoned arguments and additional information and 
links.

Of course it is always going to be the case that unethical practitioners 
  may get involved in inappropriate behavior, but I think this is no 
argument for simply accepting it.  Rather, it is a strong argument for 
asking people to do this the right way: transparently and allowing 
independent editors to make the actual editing decisions.

--Jimbo
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l


 		
---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com