[WikiEN-l] Is editing for payment a fundamentally problematic conflict of interest?

[Erik Moeller]

On 3/3/07, Jaap Vermeulen <jaap.vermeulen at gmail.com> wrote:
> "I have recently been approached by an organisation to improve articles
> related to the organisation in question (not create new ones). I would
> receive money for doing so.

Presently, I would consider this unacceptable.

There is a scenario which I would consider viable:

a) a person paid to do editing is paid to edit in a specific field,
rather than only about a single entity in that field.
b) the person is paid to do so by trusted non-profit organization X,
which receives money from interested organizations.
c) the person is chosen by organization X.
d) the editor must identify the nature of their editorial work on
their user page. This will link to a page on the website of
organization X where the nature of the relationship is described.
e) all edits are expected to be in line with existing policy.

X might == Wikimedia, but keep in mind that this would change the
relation of the WMF to its content, so it might be preferable for a
separate organization we trust to handle this. It might be a
subsidiary.

If we think back to the Microsoft case, I think it would be fine for
an independent organization to pay someone who generally improves the
articles about open document standards under strict adherence to NPOV,
and it would be fine for Microsoft and other interested parties to pay
money to the Foundation for this. It would not be fine for Microsoft
to hire someone.

That said, I doubt my position has majority support.
-- 
Peace & Love,
Erik

DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.

"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic