[WikiEN-l] RFC on paid editing

[Fred Bauder]

We are all free to contact our congressional representatives, but
professional lobbyists are much more effective, as professional pubic
relations representatives would be with respect to Wikipedia content.

Fred

> Regular editing is problematic to some degree as well. What we lose is
> flattery we will gain in accuracy & completeness. It is much easier to
> revise  an article to remove the puffery that to supplement an
> inadequate article.
>
> How many articles as submitted actually comply with all WP
> requirements? The power of WP is the open group editing, and this
> would not  be compromised.
>
>
> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 6:44 AM, AGK<wikiagk at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> In principle, I welcome editors who create or expand an article for
>> payment
>> (inasmuch as their editing complies with the project's guidelines).
>> In practice, however, it would be exceedingly rare for that type of
>> editing
>> to not be problematic to some degree; the nature of the business world
>> is
>> such that paid editing would almost certainly not adhere to Wikipedia's
>> NPOV
>> policies. Consider this: if a client commissions a Wikipedia article's
>> creation, would the client be satisfied with an article that did not
>> reflect
>> a stance that was at least a smidgen flattering? I wouldn't imagine so.
>> On
>> that basis, I think a blanket discouragement from editing for payment
>> to be
>> the most sensible approach to the issue.
>>
>> AGK
>> _______________________________________________
>> WikiEN-l mailing list
>> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>