![]() | This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!
|
This project is to discuss, raise awareness of, and hopefully address issues regarding paid advocacy editing on Wikipedia, in which people are compensated to create and edit Wikipedia articles.
Editors who are troubled to some degree by the presence of paid advocates on the Wikipedia.
Editors who are 1) editing the Wikipedia for pay (on a contract or as part of their salaried duties) and 2) editing the Wikipedia at the behest of someone else (a boss or client). To this may be added 3) to promote a particular point of view (however subtly), but generally we are to assume that persons who meet criteria #1 and #2 generally must meet #3, absent proof to the contrary.
In a nutshell, we are most often talking about either public relations (PR) agents or else employees of a corporation acting under orders.
The following cases are not considered paid advocates, and not considered problematical, for the purposes of this project:
Anyone else who is editing the Wikipedia for pay, and editing at the behest of another person, is possibly or at least potentially a problematic paid advocate (even if working for a non-profit entity).
(We're not dogmatic about this. If, for instance, ExxonMobil was (for some reason) to hire a person to edit Byzantine Empire under the Heraclian dynasty, it's quite possible that there'd be no problem there. However, this isn't really the core of the problem we're dealing with here, and exceptions like this, as well as classes of exceptions, can be discussed and handled using reason and common sense.)
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI) is the primary guideline. See also plain and simple COI help.
See Principles.
WikiProject Integrity (formerly WikiProject Paid Advocacy Watch)
None; this is a top-level Wikiproject.
None.
#wikipedia-en-pawonirc.freenode.net
This list is incomplete; you can help by adding missing items.
|
Your edit summaries like this are not helpful. There is already a {{Connected contributor (paid)}} disclosure by CorporateM on the talk page. If you find any of his articles that do not have the disclosure bring it up on his talk page. As long as paid editors stay within the terms of use they must be tolerated, or even supported. The ones that do not must be directed to our policies, {{uw-paid1}} is a good thing to use if you suspect an undisclosed paid editor. If they do not comply they can be blocked. If you want to change this please participate in the various discussions about paid editing that pop up every couple weeks or do some work at WP:COIN. Cheers. JbhTalk 13:38, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Talk pages that include the template of the Integrity project may be viewed at Category:WikiProject Integrity articles.
Integrity | ||||
|
{{Connected contributor}} - for article talk page
The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
|
{{COI}} - for article page
A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. Please discuss further on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
Project userbox:
{{User:UBX/INTEGRITY}}
This user is a member of the Integrity Project |
Alternate project userbox, based on an earlier version:
{{User:UBX/PAIDWATCH}}
This user is a member of the Paid Advocacy Watch Project (WP:PAIDWATCH) |
Suitable for awarding to anyone who has made a material contribution to the project's goals. (Improvement by better artist welcome.)
Not sure about this. On the one hand, some of these links provides a kind of one-stop shop for people looking for ways to influence Wikipedia or sign on with entities that are. On the other hand, forewarned is forearmed. It's no good to blunder about in ignorance. It makes sense to us to have materials collected that would be helpful to Wikipedians wishing to consider and discuss this phenomenon.
These are some PR people's takes:
Forums:
Here's a couple of older links (preceding the contretemps) about BP greenwashing in general:
| |
---|---|
WikiProject guides |
|
Directories and summaries |
|
Culture and the arts |
|
Geographical |
|
History and society |
|
Science, technology and engineering |
|
Wikipedia assistance and tasks |
|
Wikipedia key policies and guidelines (?)
| |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||||||
Content (?) |
| ||||||||||
Conduct (?) |
| ||||||||||
Deletion (?) |
| ||||||||||
Enforcement (?) |
| ||||||||||
Editing (?) |
| ||||||||||
Project content (?) |
| ||||||||||
WMF (?) |
| ||||||||||
|