Should Wikipedians Edit Stories For Pay?

Hugh Pickens writes "The Register reports that a longtime Wikipedia admin has been caught offering to edit the online encyclopedia in exchange for cash. Someone noticed a post to an online job marketplace where he was advertising his services: 'Besides technical writing, I also am an accomplished senior Wikipedia administrator with several featured articles to my name,' read the post, which has since been changed. 'If you need a good profile on Wikipedia, I can help you out there too through my rich experience.' Wikipedia promptly opened a discussion page to try to reach consensus on the community view of 'paid editing.' So far opinion seems to be divided between those who say it's ok as long as full disclosure is made and 'edits are compliant with WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:BLP, WP:N,' and others who believe that paid editing automatically creates a conflict of interest. Back in 2006, Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales shot down a company known as MyWikiBiz, which promised that you could 'author your legacy on the Internet.' The company subsequently had to reinvent itself with no reference to Wikipedia. 'It is not ok with me that anyone ever set up a service selling their services as a Wikipedia editor, administrator, bureaucrat, etc., I will personally block any cases that I am shown,' wrote Wales."

Comments

How much

[calmofthestorm]

for positive arguments on the consensus reaching page? I need a well-written, convincing opinion advocating in favor of market forces.

Re:How much

[greenreaper]

Sure. Just tell me what articles you're interested in, and I'll be sure to let you know how much it'll cost you to keep them the way they are.

Re:How much

[Anonymous Coward]

The problem is, you can't argue for market forces when the market is against it. Its like trying to market ham at a kosher deli, they aren't going to want it, and no matter how many times you want to "let the free market decide" they simply don't want it.

Some actors in the market are against it. Some are for it, as the summary shows. The end result is a black market, the same as always when an authority attempts to prevent supply and demand from meeting.

So, you're saying that there are some Jews who REALLY like ham?

Bad idea, but ...

[PPH]

... can we pay certain people not to edit it?

Re:Good start. But let's boil it down.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's that sort of reasoning that gets us ridiculous laws regarding child porn (like kids sexting eachother being charged as sex offenders).

Sorry, that's not the law. That's stupid fucking prosecutors. They need years of college to learn to be so fucking stupid you know.

I get paid to post on Slashdot!

[Anonymous Coward]

Every single time I post, I get paid. Mod points increase the amount. It's awesome and increases the quality of my contributions here. Why some discussions I get dozens of posts and rake in the dough!

(Sssh, don't tell Cmdr Taco!)

Re:I get paid to post on Slashdot!

[name*censored*]

Every single time I post, I get paid.

Well that doesn't surprise me. I bet you get paid by the post - you must account for at least 1/3 of the posts here, M(r/s). Coward!

Re:Good start. But let's boil it down.

[innerweb]

Charging children with crimes like these is outrageous. That would be like charging them with copyright violations and slapping them with huge fines for downloading music they did not pay for. Oh, wait...

InnerWeb

well said, thank you

[circletimessquare]

so i will send you the $50 we discussed previously via paypal now

Re:I've spent $300 on this already

[FishWithAHammer]

I have personally given $300 to individuals who have worked to raise furry articles [wikipedia.org] to good article status [wikipedia.org]. I see nothing wrong with this.

I do.

Re:Imagine . . . How you could protect yourself he

[Hope Thelps]

Don't bring your propaganda here.

Gentlemen, you can't spread propaganda in here! This is Slashdot.