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

Welcome, Guest! ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Paid editing, opinions on paid editing
ebc123
post Wed 8th December 2010, 8:08pm
Post #1


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed 1st Dec 2010, 4:56pm
Member No.: 34,572



To state my opinion up front, what does it matter if you are paid to write about a person or organization or whatever and you follow the conflict of interest, neutral point-of-view, etc. guidelines, include most if not all the necessary references and basically produce an average to above average encyclopedic page?

For one thing there are many notable people out there who likely will never have a page written about them unless someone else takes the initiative to contact them or if they decide to contact someone to do it for them. I mean, it's nice and all to donate your time but unfortunately in this world the bills arrive every month. Again if you're able to be up front with a client and spell out the Wiki ground rules and from there produce a quality piece, what does it matter that you were paid?

For another thing it stands to reason that many if not most pages on Wikipedia are originally created and subsequently edited by people who have some abiding (some may say "slanted") interest in the topic. Why else bother with the effort?

So there's that. I'm wondering as far as paid editing what other people have to say. In addition to the above comments namely:

1. If you submit to Wikipedia's encouragement to divulge your paid arrangement, are you forever and automatically tagged with a "conflict of interest" heading?

2. If you divulge your paid status, are you now basically chum for other editors to tear your piece apart no matter how well it conforms to style and substance?

Thank you for any thoughts on this.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 8th December 2010, 9:20pm
Post #2


Member
*********

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



Welcome, new member.

You'll want to read this, I think.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Thu 9th December 2010, 2:49am
Post #3


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 8th December 2010, 9:20pm) *

Welcome, new member.

You'll want to read this, I think.


Never letting up a chance to spam your company, eh, Greg? Maybe we should have "paid WR posting" too. Like when Jimbo wants to say something here but is too afraid, so he hires a random noob to do it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Cla68
post Thu 9th December 2010, 4:58am
Post #4


Postmaster
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,763
Joined: Fri 18th Apr 2008, 5:53pm
Member No.: 5,761

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



I support paid editing of Wikipedia. As Greg has pointed out, a paid editor will usually obey WP's rules because they want their edits to stick around and not be messed with.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Thu 9th December 2010, 9:23am
Post #5


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(melloden @ Wed 8th December 2010, 8:49pm) *
Never letting up a chance to spam your company, eh, Greg? Maybe we should have "paid WR posting" too.

Will you give me a dollar for every time Greg refers to you as "Mike" from now on?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Alison
post Thu 9th December 2010, 10:26am
Post #6


Skinny Cow!
********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,514
Joined: Tue 26th Jun 2007, 8:08pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 1,806



QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 9th December 2010, 1:23am) *

Will you give me a dollar for every time Greg refers to you as "Mike" from now on?

laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif laugh.gif wacko.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 9th December 2010, 12:06pm
Post #7


Member
*********

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



QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 8th December 2010, 9:49pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 8th December 2010, 9:20pm) *

Welcome, new member.

You'll want to read this, I think.


Never letting up a chance to spam your company, eh, Greg? Maybe we should have "paid WR posting" too. Like when Jimbo wants to say something here but is too afraid, so he hires a random noob to do it.


I see you joined WR only hours before ebc123, yet you already are fluent in the "Greg advertising his company" meme.

...Mike...
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Herschelkrustofsky
post Thu 9th December 2010, 3:38pm
Post #8


Member
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,199
Joined: Tue 18th Apr 2006, 12:05pm
From: Kalifornia
Member No.: 130

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(melloden @ Wed 8th December 2010, 6:49pm) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 8th December 2010, 9:20pm) *

Welcome, new member.

You'll want to read this, I think.


Never letting up a chance to spam your company, eh, Greg? Maybe we should have "paid WR posting" too.
Or maybe plugs for Wipipedia. No, not that kind of plugs.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Text
post Thu 9th December 2010, 3:59pm
Post #9


Senior Member
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 491
Joined: Sun 1st Nov 2009, 3:08pm
Member No.: 15,107



QUOTE
...Mike...


Image
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ebc123
post Thu 9th December 2010, 4:50pm
Post #10


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed 1st Dec 2010, 4:56pm
Member No.: 34,572



I suppose it's to be expected on occasion that a person is used as a pawn in previously-standing bad blood between other posters. Whatever. But in this case at least is it too much to ask for people to offer some information, especially answers my two questions, before or after they rip the other guy? I would really appreciate it. Thank you.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Thu 9th December 2010, 5:06pm
Post #11


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(ebc123 @ Thu 9th December 2010, 11:50am) *

I suppose it's to be expected on occasion that a person is used as a pawn in previously-standing bad blood between other posters. Whatever. But in this case at least is it too much to ask for people to offer some information, especially answers my two questions, before or after they rip the other guy? I would really appreciate it. Thank you.

You'll find that the vast majority here don't see anything wrong with paid editors, or with people being paid to write in general. The lack of direct response is mostly because we've been over it over and over (and because there isn't really anyone taking the other side to have a drag out flame war about, which means not enough lulz).

Welcome to WR. happy.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ebc123
post Thu 9th December 2010, 7:19pm
Post #12


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed 1st Dec 2010, 4:56pm
Member No.: 34,572



Thanks SB Johnny for the reply and the welcome!

Actually I've gone through the forums quite a bit both manually and though search topics "paid editing" "conflict of interest" and didn't find all that much.

I still have these three questions that I'd be very appreciative if someone could supply answers to.

1. Do you recommend divulging a paid arrangement as per Wikipedia's suggested guideline?

2. If you do submit to Wikipedia's encouragement to divulge, are you automatically tagged with a "conflict of interest" or similar heading?

3. If you divulge your paid status, are you basically chum for other editors to tear your piece apart no matter how well it conforms to style and substance?

Thanks again!
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Basil
post Thu 9th December 2010, 10:17pm
Post #13


New Member
*

Group: Contributors
Posts: 38
Joined: Sun 2nd Nov 2008, 1:29pm
Member No.: 8,782



Do not divulge a paid arrangement.
Write articles. Take money. Keep mouth shut.
Good luck.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Thu 9th December 2010, 10:28pm
Post #14


blah
*********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Basil @ Thu 9th December 2010, 2:17pm) *
Do not divulge a paid arrangement.
Write articles. Take money. Keep mouth shut.
Good luck.

Yep. Do not go around bragging about it.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Thu 9th December 2010, 10:31pm
Post #15


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(ebc123 @ Thu 9th December 2010, 1:19pm) *
I still have these three questions that I'd be very appreciative if someone could supply answers to.

As indicated above, the answers are still "no," "yes" and "yes," but that may be changing over time as younger, more realistic WP'ers start to actually consider the problem.

In other words, past reactions to "paid editing" were based on the "information must be free!" meme popular with freikultur social libertarians, which of course is a crock, especially if applied as broadly as the WP'ers in question have wanted to apply it. These folks also have short attention spans, and don't really consider potentially positive rationales for businesses being paid to write WP content within the limitations of WP's own business model. Many of those rationales are not only legitimate, they're actually beneficial to the WP cause, and that's what many of them failed to understand.

On another level, you also have to bear in mind that WP'ers, who generally lack critical thinking ability and are unable to see moral/ethical grey areas, tend to take an all-or-nothing approach to anything that might seem new or unorthodox. If someone can come up with a single realistic example of someone abusing the system in a way they deem harmful (as opposed to their own abuse of others, which is "different"), then this often negates any positive examples brought up in the course of discussion. In fact, many WP'ers are actually extremely conservative, if not reactionary, in their approach to site administration - this is why we sometimes refer to them as "hard-liners" or even "cultists."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Thu 9th December 2010, 10:56pm
Post #16


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(ebc123 @ Thu 9th December 2010, 2:19pm) *

Thanks SB Johnny for the reply and the welcome!

Actually I've gone through the forums quite a bit both manually and though search topics "paid editing" "conflict of interest" and didn't find all that much.

I still have these three questions that I'd be very appreciative if someone could supply answers to.

1. Do you recommend divulging a paid arrangement as per Wikipedia's suggested guideline?

2. If you do submit to Wikipedia's encouragement to divulge, are you automatically tagged with a "conflict of interest" or similar heading?

3. If you divulge your paid status, are you basically chum for other editors to tear your piece apart no matter how well it conforms to style and substance?

Thanks again!

YW

1. I would, but then that's just me.

2. Yup

3. Actually, the real problem is that there are probably one or two mentally disturbed wikipedians right now just waiting to try to connect your divulging with this WR thread, because WR is evil and anyone who asks questions here is evil. Any well-meaning advice you receive here will be held against you in the Court of Wikidrama.

Seriously though: if you're asking because you're not the kind of person who likes to deceive, then yes, of course, you should just talk straight. As long as you follow the other rulez, they'll bitch but they'll have no teeth.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SB_Johnny
post Thu 9th December 2010, 11:02pm
Post #17


It wasn't me who made honky-tonk angels
*******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 2,128
Joined: Mon 15th Sep 2008, 3:10pm
Member No.: 8,272

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(Somey @ Thu 9th December 2010, 5:31pm) *

...

All it takes is one fella doing it the right way and in the open to screw the Old Guard.

Not that I'm saying this fella is the one to do it (or that he's not the fella to do it).

and I still think you've set the "merge to last post" clock waaaaaay to short.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ebc123
post Thu 9th December 2010, 11:42pm
Post #18


Neophyte


Group: Contributors
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed 1st Dec 2010, 4:56pm
Member No.: 34,572



Thanks for the information!

As far as "Actually, the real problem is that there are probably one or two mentally disturbed wikipedians right now just waiting to try to connect your divulging with this WR thread, because WR is evil and anyone who asks questions here is evil."

How is someone possibly connecting my divulging here?

How does someone determine on Wikipedia if you are getting paid?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
wikieyeay
post Fri 10th December 2010, 12:11am
Post #19


Member
***

Group: Contributors
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri 16th Oct 2009, 2:30pm
Member No.: 14,760



QUOTE(ebc123 @ Thu 9th December 2010, 11:42pm) *

Thanks for the information!

As far as "Actually, the real problem is that there are probably one or two mentally disturbed wikipedians right now just waiting to try to connect your divulging with this WR thread, because WR is evil and anyone who asks questions here is evil."

How is someone possibly connecting my divulging here?

How does someone determine on Wikipedia if you are getting paid?


Speculation and finger pointing, the Wikipedia stock-in-trade.

On which subject:
Stock in Trade (T-H-L-K-D)

Not hard at all.

Register a new account, and get editing.

Just don't make the mistake of including your company/product name in your wikipedia username, because although obviously that would be more transparent and accountable, in whacky wikiland it will earn you an instant permaban and your article will probably be deleted as well... Best to call yourself something portentous but meaningless, that way you'll be able to get away with indefinitely.

Obviously don't do all your paid editing from the same username, that risks the whole house of cards if you get 'busted' for one. Much better to have them separate.

If you do get seriously 'busted' they might break out the leet wikispy tools, which they laughably think can track down 'sockpuppets'. They can't, but they can track other users from the same IP.

It might be worth getting some VPN accounts (about $5/month) if you want to keep things strictly 'clean'.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
melloden
post Fri 10th December 2010, 1:39am
Post #20


.
****

Group: Contributors
Posts: 450
Joined: Tue 30th Nov 2010, 4:43pm
Member No.: 34,482



QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 9th December 2010, 12:06pm) *


I see you joined WR only hours before ebc123, yet you already are fluent in the "Greg advertising his company" meme.

...Mike...


I know the trends. Mike is a boring name, at any rate.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

3 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: 25th 3 17, 2:03am