Slashdot Mirror
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."
for positive arguments on the consensus reaching page? I need a well-written, convincing opinion advocating in favor of market forces.
93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
... can we pay certain people not to edit it?
Have gnu, will travel.
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
Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
so i will send you the $50 we discussed previously via paypal now
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
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.
"You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
Don't bring your propaganda here.
Gentlemen, you can't spread propaganda in here! This is Slashdot.
To summarise the summary of the summary: people are a problem. ~ h2g2
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!
Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive