Interestingly, this reminds me of a quote in Daniel Terdiman's article about his entry's AFD:
<<I asked a friend, Business 2.0 magazine senior editor Chris Taylor, about his Wikipedia entry, which was created in 2005 when he wrote about Wikipedia for Time magazine.
"It didn't take long to realize why the entry had been made--and the timing, right after my authorship of the first Time story on Wikipedia, made sense," Taylor said. "So after the initial feelings of flattery and suspicion, I was like, Oh, OK, this is my 'reward' from the Wiki geeks. I wrote about their baby, so I've arrived.">>
http://news.com.com/To+delete+Wikipedia+entry+or+not+to+delete+-+page+2/2100...
Regards, RB
On 1/27/07, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:
Bryan Derksen wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
Tagged {{db-web}} by an anon and speedied by Aaron Brenneman 6.5 hours later, which was 1.5 hours after Quarl removed the speedy tag, recommending AfD/prod in his edit summary. I think that counts as out-of-process deletion. How about I undelete it and clean it up a bit? Notable or not, the deleted text does have the tone of an advertisement.
IMO there's no need to ask in a case as clear as this, just go ahead and do it. I've already started. :)
I sent them an email berating them for the uncritical tone of the original article. Ironically, they published a feature this month about dealing with negative comment in blogs. Their recommendations about respect, candour and the importance of facts could easily be extended to astroturfing in Wikipedia articles.
http://brandchannel.com/features_effect.asp?pf_id=348
-- Tim Starling
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l