[WikiEN-l] "should not be written by an interested party"

[Cheney Shill]

I agree with Steve's definition of an interested party.  In this context, that would basically apply to people who's jobs directly or indirectly depend on a political party's success.  Politicians, fund raisers, a PR company that does most of its business for a party, a business that receives billions in goernment contracts.  WIki has a nice article that covers most of this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest 

Joe Anderson <computerjoe.mailinglist at googlemail.com> wrote: IMO, taking the interested party has a NPOV, it's fine.

For example, a member of the Democrat Party is an interested part in the
Democratic Party article, should they be able to edit it? Same goes for the
NGS and Wikipedia.

On 5/1/06, Steve Bennett  wrote:

> A vocal opponent is not an interested party. An interested party is a
> party with, well, an interest in the matter, like a shareholder,
> employee etc. For Wikipedia purposes, you can pretty much consider
> interested party to mean the party itself.



		
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.