[Wikimedia-l] Paid editing v. paid advocacy (editing)

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
In what language does this "disclosure" have to be ??
Thanks,
     Gerard


On 12 January 2014 12:29, Craig Franklin <cfranklin at halonetwork.net> wrote:

> On 12 January 2014 02:58, MZMcBride <z at mzmcbride.com> wrote:
>
> > Craig Franklin wrote:
> > >I think it's actually foolish to try and split hairs over what is
> > >acceptable paid editing and what is unacceptable paid editing.  The
> facts
> > >of the matter are that paid editing is taking place right now, and it
> will
> > >continue to take place regardless of whatever "bright lines" are drawn
> in
> > >the sand.  The only question is whether it's done in a covert manner,
> or a
> > >transparent manner.
> > >
> > >Rather than arguing over the irrelevant question of whether it is
> > >desirable to have paid editing or not, we need instead to be talking
> > >about how we are going to handle it.  To my view, that should be
> > >requiring that anyone editing for money be upfront about their
> intentions
> > >and their edits, and letting the community scrutinise those edits and
> > >deal with them just like they'd deal with them if they came from any
> > >other editor.
> >
> > Perhaps you're correct, though I'll note that in the recent oDesk case,
> > you had both a real name and photo attached to the activities, along with
> > a public profile describing (and rating!) the activities. That seems
> > fairly transparent to me, yet it still resulted in an immediate
> departure.
>
>
> I was thinking more along the lines of a centralised disclosure list where
> people can say "My name is X, my user account is Y, and I am doing paid
> editing on article Z".  Such a thing would of course invite a lot more
> scrutiny on the articles in question, which would mean that they're less
> likely to devolve into hagiography.  From what I can see this is already
> working quite well and without controversy at places like dewp.  We already
> have rules (on enwp at least) about promotional language, spam,
> sockpuppeting, and the like; I don't see any compelling reason we need
> another separate bunch of rules to deal with these situations in the
> special case where someone is being paid to edit.
>
> Cheers,
> Craig
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> Wikimedia-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-request at lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>