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
EricBarbour
post Tue 28th December 2010, 10:06pm
Post #41


blah
*********

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

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(tarantino @ Mon 27th December 2010, 6:36pm) *
SqueakBox is mentioned yet again at AN/I for paid editing, and despite credible allegations of him lying about it, his account remains free to edit.

QUOTE
I am not one of the people inalterably opposed to paid editing, but I think you have exceeding reasonable limits. I am so convinced you have exceeded the limits of tolerance that I would have already blocked you, except that you or anyone should have in fairness an opportunity to respond. What is wanted is a commitment that you will not write articles about subjects you know to be non-encyclopedic, or make use of sources you know to be false, and that you will declare all further paid editing. DGG ( talk ) 05:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

So what does SqueakBox do? He says nothing. Silence.

If DGG doesn't follow up on this, you will know for certain that Jimbo's buttsniffers can openly edit
articles for money with complete impunity. While "troublemakers" like Greg shall be banned for infinity.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Thu 30th December 2010, 6:10pm
Post #42


Member
*********

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



Their inability to pull the trigger on him is clearly past the laughable stage now.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Sun 2nd January 2011, 6:42pm
Post #43


Member
*********

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



Well, it looks like the Squeaker has finally been indefinitely blocked by Black Kite.

Meanwhile, Jimbo in his ever-familiar way of waffling on everything, speaks out about paid editing.

Everything clear?
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Mon 3rd January 2011, 8:30am
Post #44


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(thekohser @ Sun 2nd January 2011, 12:42pm) *
Well, it looks like the Squeaker has finally been indefinitely blocked by Black Kite.

It's the end of an era... rolleyes.gif

QUOTE
Meanwhile, Jimbo in his ever-familiar way of waffling on everything, speaks out about paid editing.

Everything clear?

What he seems to be saying is that rewards should only be offered for articles related to (ideally, non-specific) topic areas, as opposed to specific individual persons or (worse) companies.

On the one hand this is stupid, because an "encyclopedia" shouldn't discriminate against specific entities merely because they might want to be written about. Like it or not, some people might very well want to read stuff about the entities in question, and if those entities are foolish enough to want to have WP articles about themselves, that's their funeral. On the other hand, Jimbo is essentially forced to say this because this is how activist Wikipedians define the site's "integrity" - anti-commercialism appears to be more important to many of them than content in general, and certainly more important than content about things they despise or, at best, don't care about.

It's easy to perceive this as basic hypocrisy, but in fact it's a kind of spoil-sport politics, with Jimbo trying to use the issue as a way to keep himself involved as a kind of high arbiter - or "spiritual leader," if you will. We know he doesn't care about the fact that people are making money writing articles. He probably understands that Wikipedia's definition of "COI" is ludicrously idiosyncratic, but likely doesn't care about that either. What he does care about is to ensure that the people who don't like the idea of anyone else making money at article-writing are exposed to it as little as possible.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:44pm
Post #45


Member
*********

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



QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:30am) *

What he seems to be saying is that rewards should only be offered for articles related to (ideally, non-specific) topic areas, as opposed to specific individual persons or (worse) companies.


Jimbo was most clear that the Reward Board request for article content about dANN was "absolutely inappropriate".

But, then, do you notice that Jimbo doesn't so much as lift a finger to bring his displeasure to the attention of the guy who posted that request on Reward Board?

Maybe it's because that guy looks like he would whup that sh*t out of Jimbo.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Somey
post Mon 3rd January 2011, 8:20pm
Post #46


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(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 9:44am) *
But, then, do you notice that Jimbo doesn't so much as lift a finger to bring his displeasure to the attention of the guy who posted that request on Reward Board?

As well he shouldn't. He's learned his lesson, and after all, he's got far more serious problems to deal with these days! sick.gif
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Infomercial
post Mon 3rd January 2011, 9:51pm
Post #47


Junior Member
**

Group: Contributors
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu 23rd Dec 2010, 4:44pm
Member No.: 36,317

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 10:44am) *

QUOTE(Somey @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 3:30am) *

What he seems to be saying is that rewards should only be offered for articles related to (ideally, non-specific) topic areas, as opposed to specific individual persons or (worse) companies.

Maybe it's because that guy looks like he would whup that sh*t out of Jimbo.

That guy looks like he'd whup that sh*t out of the Hulk.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
EricBarbour
post Tue 4th January 2011, 11:26am
Post #48


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 @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 12:20pm) *
QUOTE(thekohser @ Mon 3rd January 2011, 9:44am) *
But, then, do you notice that Jimbo doesn't so much as lift a finger to bring his displeasure to the attention of the guy who posted that request on Reward Board?
As well he shouldn't. He's learned his lesson, and after all, he's got far more serious problems to deal with these days! sick.gif

Most of the really annoying crap in that article was inserted by a hopeless nerd called DeathBunny (T-C-L-K-R-D) .
It's been a major battleground for the past year---and I'll be damned if I can discern a pattern.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
ebc123
post Tue 4th January 2011, 5:10pm
Post #49


Neophyte


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



>> I really don't like the idea of paid editing. Users like me contribute heavily to WP with no compensation while these con men get paid to do the exact same thing. There are a variety of procedures if you want an article about yourself or your businesses, and if you're just patient, it'll be good in due time (as long as the notability requirement is met, of course (otherwise, you can suck it (or go to Wikipedia Review (we won't complain either way)))). Keep your dirty green presidents away from our site!

That's all I wanted to say. <<<
-- oldtimer


Considering the many rather well-documented "old-school" Wikipedia editor shenanigans described in this thread, the above post comes off to me as the proverbial stone thrown in a decidedly glass house. The "our site" stuff doesn't help much either.

I also find it hypocritical that on the one hand it's not difficult to find flimsy, obviously self-serving articles on Wikipedia that have been around for months and even years without so much as a "needs reference" flag; however, there are editors who ostensibly are just burning to toss any well-researched, properly-referenced and acceptably neutral-voiced baby out with the bath water because their detective work has determined said article was allegedly paid for. (In case you're confused oldtimer, unless someone comes out and admits paying for or being paid to write the article, the fruits of your snooping and consequent violation assertion is "alleged.") Stick to creating articles and making edits. You're needed.

It appears the majority here believe Wikipedia foremost should be a place where people can go for quality encyclopedic information. At least represent a decent starting point. Yet go to any interest group and you'll find many worthy subjects desiring an article. Surely there are a lot more that aren't listed. The notion then that a subject notable by definition should be happy to sit around and be patient while someone else MAYBE one day decides to get around to it--while someone NOW is willing to write a quality paid version--goes straight to that nose-in-the-air "our site" editorial mentality many posters here have described.

By the way, as far as my "newbie" status: true on the topic of paid editing. But I've been using and for the most part defending Wikipedia practically since it started. I've relied on it hundreds, maybe a thousand times or more as a research tool for personal and business purposes, and I wouldn't be surprised that a fair percentage of those hits landed on extremely helpful articles that were paid for. Wouldn't be surprised at all.

Finally, (I really am done but we'll see about oldtimers assertion) what these holier-than-thou editors fail to realize is that while they describe Wikipedia as a resource "for the people," they apparently give these very same people little or no credit for being able distinguish between the good, the bad and the ugly. Our site? Hardly. The "old-timers" are the gatekeepers by Zeus! Dungeons and Dragons would be nothing without them.
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Tue 4th January 2011, 5:43pm
Post #50


Member
*********

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



QUOTE(ebc123 @ Tue 4th January 2011, 12:10pm) *

The notion then that a subject notable by definition should be happy to sit around and be patient while someone else MAYBE one day decides to get around to it--while someone NOW is willing to write a quality paid version--goes straight to that nose-in-the-air "our site" editorial mentality many posters here have described.


It's a point of fact that I got the idea for Wikipedia Review (the paid editing service) when I looked for a Wikipedia article about Resorts Atlantic City, the first casino hotel in Atlantic City, founded by the famed Merv Griffin, and there was nothing to be found. Then, to my dismay, only about 4 or 5 of the city's 12 or so casino hotels had articles.

I started to investigate, and I found that about 130 of the Fortune 500 companies (at the time, around May 2006) lacked Wikipedia articles.

Here's where that "we'll get around to it eventually" attitude gets you, currently in 2011, after almost 10 years of opportunity to work on a Fortune 500 company's article:

Core-Mark

Look at that documentation, the wiki-linking, the reliable sources for all of that content! It's glorious, isn't it? And you know you can trust the information, because 95% of it was added by this dedicated Wikipedian. Before he came along, the article looked like this:

QUOTE
Core-Mark Holding Company (NASDAQ: CORE), (formerly Fleming Cos.), is a supplier of consumer package goods to retailers in the United States.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
o 1.1 Fleming Companies
o 1.2 Bankruptcy
o 1.3 Post Bankruptcy
* 2 References
* 3 External links

History
Fleming Companies

Fleming Cos was founded as Lux Mercantile in Topeka, Kansas in 1915 by O.A. Fleming, Gene Wilson and Samuel Lux. In 1941, the company name was changed to The Fleming Company, and Ned Fleming was named President, Chairman, and CEO. The company's IPO occurred in 1959, when 100,000 shares were offered. In 1981, R.D. Harrsion was elected Chairman and CEO of the company, with Dean Werries serving as President and COO. Fleming Cos grew to become the nation's largest supplier of consumer package goods to U.S. retailers, serving approximately 50,000 retail locations. These locations included supermarkets such as IGA,[1] convenience stores, supercenters, discount stores, concessions, limited assortment, drug, specialty, casinos, gift shops, military commissaries and exchanges and others. The company later moved its headquarters to Oklahoma City, Oklahoma in 1984 and then to Lewisville, Texas in 2000 before it went into bankruptcy.
Bankruptcy

Fleming Companies announced on April 2003 that it had filed for reorganization under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The company's fortunes had suffered considerably over the previous two years as the result of an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission into questionable business and accounting practices. Fleming had also faced a class-action lawsuit from its shareholders over the validity of its public statements, ended its relationship with its largest customer, Kmart, and saw its stock price drop to less than one dollar per share. [2] Peter S. Willmott, a member of the company's board of directors, was appointed to lead Fleming through reorganization.

The plan Willmott adopted provided for the reorganization of Fleming's debtors around Core-Mark, a wholesale distribution company founded in 1888 and acquired by Fleming in June 2002. Fleming's other assets and liabilities were transferred to two special-purpose trusts, to be liquidated. All outstanding common stock in Fleming was canceled.[3]
Post Bankruptcy

On August 20, 2004, Core-Mark Holding Company, Inc. emerged from the Fleming bankruptcy under the direction of president and CEO J. Michael Walsh. Core-Mark currently serves 20,000 retail locations in the U.S. and Canada, providing marketing programs and distribution and logistics services. Core-Mark relocated its headquarters to South San Francisco.
References

1. ^ Corporatewindow.com
2. ^ Referenceforbusiness.com
3. ^ Fdreports.com

* CJonline.com, "Fleming files for bankruptcy; trading halted." The Capital Journal, 4/1/2003.
* Business.com, profile: Fleming Cos Inc.
* Corporate-ir.net, Supervalu press release, 10 August 2006.
* Fleming Companies, Inc. - Pre & Post Bankruptcy Petition Copyright Infringement
* Sec.gov, August 22, 2008 - SEC Settles Enforcement Proceedings Against Former Fleming Companies, Inc. Executives Mark David Shapiro, Albert M. Abbood, and James H. Thatcher for Their Roles in Financial Fraud Scheme.
* Sec.gov, September 14, 2004 - Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dean Foods Company and John D. Robinson, Civil Action No. 4:04 CV-321/Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division)- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kemps LLC, f/k/a Marigold Foods LLC, James Green and Christopher Thorpe, Civil Action No. 4:04 CV-323/Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division)- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Digital Exchange Systems, Inc., Rosario Coniglio and Steven Schmidt, Civil Action No. 4:04 CV-324/Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division)- Securities and Exchange Commission v. John K. Adams, Civil Action No. 4:04 CV-322/Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division)- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Bruce Keith Jensen, Civil Action No. 4:04 CV-320/Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division).

External links

* Core-Mark website


I have to say it...

Wikipedia: always improving, and quickly.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Milton Roe
post Tue 4th January 2011, 7:49pm
Post #51


Known alias of J. Random Troll
*********

Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined: Thu 28th Feb 2008, 1:03am
Member No.: 5,156

WP user page - talk
check - contribs



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th January 2011, 10:43am) *

I have to say it...

Wikipedia: always improving, and quickly.

When you get to the lists of WP:NOT stuff that actually exists in profusion, then you come to what we might call the "Wiki-Apocrypha." It's the uncannonical part that is super-sized directory, almanac, defammation, dictionary work, loved quotations. And of course, add to this foundation decisions, official policies, pilars, unofficial policies, Sayings of Jimbo (Little Red Book of these), guidelines, recommendations, essays, past Arbcomm decisions, and a certain amount of Talmudic commentary on TALK pages associated with all of it.

About all of which we can only say: "Improvement commeth, and that right soon."
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Wed 5th January 2011, 2:59pm
Post #52


Member
*********

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



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th January 2011, 12:43pm) *

Core-Mark

Look at that documentation, the wiki-linking, the reliable sources for all of that content! It's glorious, isn't it? And you know you can trust the information, because 95% of it was added by this dedicated Wikipedian.


Again, after almost 18 hours, nobody's lifted a finger on Wikipedia. One would have to conclude that they prefer this version of the Core-Mark article...

QUOTE
Core-Mark Holding Company (NASDAQ: CORE), (formerly Fleming Cos.), is a supplier of consumer package goods to retailers in the United States.
Contents

* 1 History
o 1.1 Glaser Brothers
o 1.2 Core-Mark
* 2 External links

History
Glaser Brothers

In 1888, Michaelis Glaser, a German immigrant and cigar roller by trade, opened a small tobacco shop near the center of San Francisco. Michaels' younger brother, Arnold, joined him from Germany in 1890 and it was then the company name became Glaser Bros. Arnold assumed the management of the growing retail store and Michaelis established a wholesale route selling tobacco products to other retailers. Each morning the elder brother loaded his horse-drawn wagon and delivered the orders he had received the previous day. Then in the afternoon he would take more orders from other customers on his route and the next day he repeated the ritual.

Firm policies were set by the brothers for the conduct of their business. An important one was never to deal in inferior goods; always offer the best products. By 1906 the retail and wholesale operations had grown and prospered to the degree a second retail store was opened. The eighteen years of labor had established a bright future for the Glaser Bros. It was destroyed in less than thirty seconds by one devastating San Francisco earthquake.

Blessed with the spirit to win over adversity, the two brothers began to build anew. Within two years they were larger in scope than before and had reduced their debt to nil. As part of the growth plan for the company, they entered the business of distributing candy. Their first line was Suchard Chocolates. They took on other lines and soon candy became a significant adjunct to their tobacco business.

Michaelis Glaser died in 1919, but he lived long enough to see part of his plans for expansion come into being with the opening of the company's first branch sales office and warehouse in Bakersfield. Arnold Glaser took over the complete running of the company and the firm began to branch out both to the north and the south of San Francisco.

Wall Street on the opposite coast crashed in 1929. With it collapsed hundreds of companies, and thousands of individuals went bankrupt. Glaser Bros. weathered the day because its assets were tied up in merchandise and not in the paper of other companies. The company entered 1930 doing 6 million dollars a year and despite the difficulties of the Depression, it ended that decade doing a volume of 11 million dollars annually.

The domestic shortages brought about by Word War II were doubly difficult for Glaser Bros. due to the shortages of tobacco and products made from sugar. Compounded by the shortage of gasoline to deliver their merchandise, the company set in motion a policy of fair pro rata share-out of available goods to their customers and in "zone" deliveries; they never once missed dispatching orders to buyers the day after the order was taken. The company continued to grow all through the war. Arnold Glaser, the last of the brothers, died in 1946 and the management passed to Marcus Glaser, the son of Michaelis. Arnold left the company that had 48 salesmen, 15 branches, about 3,000 customers and annual sales of nearly 38 million dollars. The early post war years saw the distributing company continue a program of expansion and further branches were established in California, Oregon, Washington, Idaho, Utah and Nevada. Candy distribution from its inception had been an important part of the Glaser Bros. structure. In 1966 the company founded a subsidiary, Cable Car Candies. The company, located in Long Beach, California, started manufacturing various types of confections for distribution by Glaser Bros. Eventually the lines included merchandise from small bagged items through to boxed gourmet chocolates. A milestone was reached in 1970 when the company achieved annual sales of 200 million dollars. The company now had 27 branches and nearly 800 employees.

In 1974 Marcus Glaser sold his majority shareholding to a group headed by David E. Gillespie. Gillespie, with a background in corporate administration and finance along with marketing experience on an international level, brought to the company a spirit to build and develop not unike the founding brothers. The company swiftly moved into an unprecedented era of growth and new design.

Core-Mark

Today, Core-Mark is one of the largest broad-line, full-service marketers and distributors of packaged consumer products in North America. Core-Mark provides distribution and logistics services as well as marketing programs to over 26,000 retail locations across the United States and Canada through its 26 distribution centers. Core-Mark services traditional convenience retailers, grocers, mass merchandisers, drug, liquor and specialty stores, and other stores that carry consumer packaged goods.

Core-Mark combines competitive pricing, on-time deliveries, innovative marketing programs and technology solutions so that our customers can focus on growing their business. Core-Mark is located in South San Francisco.

External links

* Core-Mark website

Categories: Companies listed on NASDAQ | Defunct companies based in Texas
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Zoloft
post Wed 5th January 2011, 3:47pm
Post #53


May we all find solace in our dreams.
******

Group: Regulars
Posts: 1,332
Joined: Fri 15th Jan 2010, 11:08pm
From: Erewhon
Member No.: 16,621



QUOTE(thekohser @ Wed 5th January 2011, 6:59am) *

QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 4th January 2011, 12:43pm) *

Core-Mark

Look at that documentation, the wiki-linking, the reliable sources for all of that content! It's glorious, isn't it? And you know you can trust the information, because 95% of it was added by this dedicated Wikipedian.


Again, after almost 18 hours, nobody's lifted a finger on Wikipedia. One would have to conclude that they prefer this version of the Core-Mark article...

QUOTE
<snippity do-da>


As a press release/corporate bio, I like it. It has snap and likeable characters. Those friendly cigar rollers in their horse-drawn wagon, fairly selling delectable candies to all. *wipes a tear from his eye*

As an encyclopedia article it's glurge.

This post has been edited by Zoloft: Wed 5th January 2011, 3:50pm
User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Tue 25th January 2011, 5:06pm
Post #54


Member
*********

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



Noted researcher Felipe Ortega is trying his hand at commenting about paid editing and its ilk, but I conclude that he's mostly missing the mark, while his cohort Yaron Koren seems to have the better understanding.

Ortega:
QUOTE
We must also note that this ((a paid editing service)) is quite different from initiatives such as the Public Policy Initiative or scientists improving Wikipedia entries on RNA biology. These editors doesn’t have a direct interest in presenting a certain point of view. They just want to improve Wikipedia’s coverage about those topics, for the common good.


Koren:
QUOTE
I think you can write fairly about a topic while still getting paid to do it. More generally, I don’t see anything fundamentally wrong with a company hiring someone to basically improve the Wikipedia article about them: to flesh it out with correctly-referenced information, and to keep out vandalism.


Kohs:
Comment awaiting approval.

User is offlineProfile CardPM
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
thekohser
post Tue 25th January 2011, 6:44pm
Post #55


Member
*********

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



QUOTE(thekohser @ Tue 25th January 2011, 12:06pm) *

Noted researcher Felipe Ortega is trying his hand at commenting about paid editing and its ilk, but I conclude that he's mostly missing the mark, while his cohort Yaron Koren seems to have the better understanding.


Felipe published my comment. I think the commentary is absolutely worth further discussion, if anyone wishes to chime in here, or there.
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
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

-   Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th 10 17, 7:18am