The Wikipedia Review: A forum for discussion and criticism of Wikipedia
Wikipedia Review Op-Ed Pages

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

9 Pages V  1 2 3 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Paid editing, finally gets a full discussion
thekohser
post Tue 9th June 2009, 8:13pm
Post #1


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



Starting a new thread, since this is likely to become an interesting spot:

Requests for comment: Paid editing

...has been opened by Rootology.

I wonder if Wikipedia will invite one of the foremost authorities on paid editing of GFDL content, and its detection?

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eva Destruction
post Tue 9th June 2009, 8:16pm
Post #2


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,735
Joined: Sun 30th Sep 2007, 7:22pm
Member No.: 3,301

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:13pm) *

Starting a new thread, since this is likely to become an interesting spot:

Requests for comment: Paid editing

...has been opened by Rootology.

I wonder if Wikipedia will invite one of the foremost authorities on paid editing of GFDL content, and its detection?

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.

I don't think the software can handle that – and I'm certain if I (or anyone) unblocked you it'd be reverted in seconds – but if you have something to say, post it here and I (or someone) will post it on your behalf. I assume even the "over my dead body" faction against you will recognise that you're in a unique position to comment on this one.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Tue 9th June 2009, 8:31pm
Post #3


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Eva Destruction @ Tue 9th June 2009, 4:16pm) *

I don't think the software can handle that – and I'm certain if I (or anyone) unblocked you it'd be reverted in seconds – but if you have something to say, post it here and I (or someone) will post it on your behalf. I assume even the "over my dead body" faction against you will recognise that you're in a unique position to comment on this one.


They don't need software. They have my word.

I'm not going to do the "Tell them I said this, tell them I said that" game. If they want my opinion, they can grant me access to that page. If not, no worries. Although... I already see several veiled and not-so-veiled insults being directed at me. They have it rigged, though, so that I may not respond.

That's really ingenious, if you think about it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jon Awbrey
post Tue 9th June 2009, 9:03pm
Post #4


τὰ δέ μοι παθήματα μαθήματα γέγονε
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 6,783
Joined: Sun 6th Apr 2008, 4:52am
From: Meat Puppet Nation
Member No.: 5,619

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 4:13pm) *

Starting a new thread, since this is likely to become an interesting spot:

Requests for comment: Paid editing

… has been opened by Rootology.

I wonder if Wikipedia will invite one of the foremost authorities on paid editing of GFDL content, and its detection?

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.


I'm guessing the whole exercise will be just about as productive of positive real-world results as Rootology's old WikiAbuseCom scam.

Jon hrmph.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hipocrite
post Tue 9th June 2009, 9:16pm
Post #5


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed 5th Nov 2008, 10:11pm
Member No.: 8,832

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 8:13pm) *

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.


You aren't an expert in the fields of PR or Ethics. You might be an expert in Military History, and possibly in Market Research, but neither of those have anything to do with PR.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 9th June 2009, 9:21pm
Post #6


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



Well, if it helps, I'd go there and point out that Greg deserves a hearing.
But if I did, I'd just cause trouble and be auto-banned....

because Shankbone is all over that discussion, and nobody has yet pointed out Shankers' many many COIs.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
anthony
post Tue 9th June 2009, 9:26pm
Post #7


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,034
Joined: Mon 30th Jul 2007, 1:31am
Member No.: 2,132



QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:21pm) *

Well, if it helps, I'd go there and point out that Greg deserves a hearing.
But if I did, I'd just cause trouble and be auto-banned....


"Why is he community banned?"

"Because no one will unblock him."

"What happens if I unblock him."

"You'll be banned."

"Why will I be banned for unblocking him?"

"Because he's community banned."

"Why is he community banned?"

"Because no one will unblock him."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 9th June 2009, 9:29pm
Post #8


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(anthony @ Tue 9th June 2009, 2:26pm) *

"Why is he community banned?"
"Because no one will unblock him."
"What happens if I unblock him."
"You'll be banned."
"Why will I be banned for unblocking him?"
"Because he's community banned."
"Why is he community banned?"
"Because no one will unblock him."

Ding Ding Ding!!! Give the man a cigar!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
RMHED
post Tue 9th June 2009, 10:19pm
Post #9


Über Member
*****

Group: Regulars
Posts: 936
Joined: Fri 8th May 2009, 8:48pm
Member No.: 11,716

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:13pm) *

Starting a new thread, since this is likely to become an interesting spot:

Requests for comment: Paid editing

...has been opened by Rootology.

I wonder if Wikipedia will invite one of the foremost authorities on paid editing of GFDL content, and its detection?

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.

Becoming a tad project space obsessed is Rootology, can't say I'm surprised though, after all he is a born again Wikipedian.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Eva Destruction
post Tue 9th June 2009, 10:21pm
Post #10


Fat Cat
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,735
Joined: Sun 30th Sep 2007, 7:22pm
Member No.: 3,301

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(RMHED @ Tue 9th June 2009, 11:19pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:13pm) *

Starting a new thread, since this is likely to become an interesting spot:

Requests for comment: Paid editing

...has been opened by Rootology.

I wonder if Wikipedia will invite one of the foremost authorities on paid editing of GFDL content, and its detection?

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.

Becoming a tad project space obsessed is Rootology, can't say I'm surprised though, after all he is a born again Wikipedian.


In his defense, 100+ of those edits were to a single Arbcom case he was involved in (Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/A Man In Black/Workshop)
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
sbrown
post Tue 9th June 2009, 10:50pm
Post #11


Senior Member
****

Group: Inactive
Posts: 441
Joined: Thu 21st May 2009, 9:14am
Member No.: 11,840



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:31pm) *

I already see several veiled and not-so-veiled insults being directed at me. They have it rigged, though, so that I may not respond.

That's really ingenious, if you think about it.

Dont take it personally. That sort of thing happens on lots of sites to lots of people.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 10th June 2009, 4:14am
Post #12


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Hipocrite @ Tue 9th June 2009, 5:16pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 9th June 2009, 8:13pm) *

They claim that they aren't opposed to expert participation in Wikipedia. I'm making myself available. I'd only need a temporary unblock, restricted to this topic only. The offer stands.


You aren't an expert in the fields of PR or Ethics. You might be an expert in Military History, and possibly in Market Research, but neither of those have anything to do with PR.


You're betraying a fatal flaw of bias yourself, Hipocrite. Paid editing of GFDL content suitable for Wikipedia isn't always about public relations (PR). In fact, a good portion of the paid editing that I've ever done that has been published on Wikipedia was for clients who were seeking nothing more than a factual, encyclopedic documentation of their existence. Sometimes this was for legal reasons, other times to address the assumption that general inquiries about the company's history would be better handled on a publicly-maintained Wikipedia page than even by a buried "About Us" sub-page on the corporate web site. In these cases, it was not about "managing" the flow of information between the company and the public (which is the purpose of PR), but "ceding control" of information about the company to the public.

One article, in fact, I made sure to include an entire paragraph about the controversial social implications of the product, since that's what was frequently appearing in the news cycle at the time, and it would have inevitably been added by an opponent of the product, sooner or later. I was surprised, though, when Wikipediots like yourself managed, over time, to quietly excise that paragraph from the live article.

Please don't lecture me about public relations or ethics, until you've gotten that beam out of your eye. What are your credentials, Hipocrite? Who are you? What productive contributions have you made to your local community, to the economy, to society? You seem to know my background better than we know yours. Are you deliberately doing that to try to appear to have a position of superiority over those you look down upon? Why didn't you follow through, Hipocrite?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Wed 10th June 2009, 4:35am
Post #13


Can't actually moderate (or even post)
*********

Group: Moderators
Posts: 11,815
Joined: Sat 17th Jun 2006, 7:47pm
From: Dreamland
Member No.: 275



QUOTE(Hipocrite @ Tue 9th June 2009, 4:16pm) *
You aren't an expert in the fields of PR or Ethics. You might be an expert in Military History, and possibly in Market Research, but neither of those have anything to do with PR.

When did "ethics" even enter into this discussion? This is Wikipedia we're talking about, remember? wacko.gif

Besides, Market Research has lots to do with PR, if the PR is being done for an entity that's trying to sell something. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge of the subject knows that. Golly, could it possibly be that you don't actually care about reality or fact, and that you're just... trolling us? Surely this cannot be!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 10th June 2009, 5:12am
Post #14


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 10th June 2009, 12:35am) *

QUOTE(Hipocrite @ Tue 9th June 2009, 4:16pm) *
You aren't an expert in the fields of PR or Ethics. You might be an expert in Military History, and possibly in Market Research, but neither of those have anything to do with PR.

When did "ethics" even enter into this discussion? This is Wikipedia we're talking about, remember? wacko.gif

Besides, Market Research has lots to do with PR, if the PR is being done for an entity that's trying to sell something. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge of the subject knows that. Golly, could it possibly be that you don't actually care about reality or fact, and that you're just... trolling us? Surely this cannot be!


Yeah, it's kind of weird that I didn't even bother to dismiss Hipocrite's stupid claim that Market Research has nothing to do with PR, when I wrote a paper entitled:

Market Research for PR
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Wed 10th June 2009, 5:21am
Post #15


blah
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 5,919
Joined: Mon 25th Feb 2008, 2:31am
Member No.: 5,066

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Tue 9th June 2009, 9:35pm) *
Golly, could it possibly be that you don't actually care about reality or fact, and that you're just... trolling us? Surely this cannot be!

Hipocrite has trolled people on WR before.
Doing it to ColScott here right now....

You're the admin, you could ban Hipocrite.....
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Hipocrite
post Wed 10th June 2009, 1:22pm
Post #16


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 203
Joined: Wed 5th Nov 2008, 10:11pm
Member No.: 8,832

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Wed 10th June 2009, 4:35am) *

Besides, Market Research has lots to do with PR, if the PR is being done for an entity that's trying to sell something. Anybody with an ounce of knowledge of the subject knows that. Golly, could it possibly be that you don't actually care about reality or fact, and that you're just... trolling us? Surely this cannot be!


Being an expert in Market Research does not make one an expert in Public Relations, the same way that being an expert in Financial Economics does not make one an expert in Sociology. One might be related to the other, but they're disparate diciplines.

QUOTE(EricBarbour @ Wed 10th June 2009, 5:21am) *
You're the admin, you could ban Hipocrite....


I DONT LIKE WHAT HE'S SAYING! BAN HIM! BAN HIM!

I guess it's goose gander equivalence here as well.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 10th June 2009, 1:45pm
Post #17


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



This comment by FayssalF is hilarious.

He advises readers to look at the Yahoo! Answer that was selected as "best answer" by the voters on that site.

Thing is, it got eleven votes as "best answer", when most of the best answers in the Wikipedia category are awarded with 2, 3, or 4 votes, typically. This particular answer was voted up by sockpuppets, because it was in the middle of my "war" with the Filipino Chess Boy, and he was very determined to make sure his answers were beating out mine (which I was socking up with 4-5 additional votes).

So, FayssalF is unwittingly holding up as evidence of "people's minds" the result of 2 or 3 users making themselves appear to be 11 users. GREAT EXAMPLE, FayssalF!

Greg

P.S. I love that Wikipedia allows this, too: "Greg Kohs was a bit of a dickhead, but only after he was shafted by Wikipedia." At least he couched it with "a bit".

This post has been edited by thekohser: Wed 10th June 2009, 1:49pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Wed 10th June 2009, 1:53pm
Post #18


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



The RfC is a complete waste of time. And if you look to see who is weighing in with their votes, it is overwhelmingly made up of people who have never written a single article and/or never contribute to the significant improvement of Wikipedia's editorial content.

Believe me, it is very, very easy to spot which articles are the creation of paid writers. And the funny thing is, the paid writers almost never disguise their real life affiliation! fear.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 10th June 2009, 1:55pm
Post #19


Member
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,274
Joined: Thu 1st Feb 2007, 10:21pm
Member No.: 911



QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 10th June 2009, 9:53am) *

Believe me, it is very, very easy to spot which articles are the creation of paid writers. And the funny thing is, the paid writers almost never disguise their real life affiliation! fear.gif


Can you spot any of the 12 or 13 paid articles that I've written?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
A Horse With No Name
post Wed 10th June 2009, 2:45pm
Post #20


I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,471
Joined: Mon 26th Jan 2009, 1:54pm
Member No.: 9,985



QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 10th June 2009, 9:55am) *

QUOTE(A Horse With No Name @ Wed 10th June 2009, 9:53am) *

Believe me, it is very, very easy to spot which articles are the creation of paid writers. And the funny thing is, the paid writers almost never disguise their real life affiliation! fear.gif


Can you spot any of the 12 or 13 paid articles that I've written?


Funny, I could ask you the same question! biggrin.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

9 Pages V  1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
3 User(s) are reading this topic (3 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 21st 9 17, 2:09pm