Conflict-of-interest (COI) is editing Wikipedia OCCURS When editors use Wikipedia to advance the interests of Their Actual gold external relationships. The type of COI editing of most concern on Wikipedia is publicized for public relations (PR) purposes. [1] Several Wikipedia policies and guidelines exist to combat conflict of interest editing, including Wikipedia: Conflict of interest and Wikipedia: Paid-contribution disclosure .

Controversies reported by the media include United States congressional staff editing articles about members of Congress in 2006; Microsoft offering a software engineer to edit articles on computing code standards in 2007; The PR firm Bell Pottinger editing articles about its customers in 2011; And the discovery in 2012 that British MPs or their staff had removed criticism from articles about those MPs. The media has also written about COI editing by BP , the Central Intelligence Agency , Diebold , Portland Communications , Sony , the Vatican , and several others.

In 2012 Wikipedia launched one of its largest sockpuppet investigations, when editors reported suspicious activity suggesting 250 accounts had been used to engage in paid editing. Wikipedia Wiki-PR , and the accounts were banned. In 2015, Operation Orangemoody uncovered another paid-editing scam, in which over 380 accounts were used to extort money from businesses to create and ostensibly protect promotional articles about them.

pedia on conflict-of-interest editing

Wikipedia , the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Wikipedia: Paid-contribution disclosure , a policy, requires that editors disclose their “employ, client, and affiliation” with respect to any contribution for which they are paid, including talk-page contributions.

In 2013 Sue Gardner , then-executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation, called “paid editing for promotional purposes” to ” black hat ” practice. ” [1] The law firm Cooley LLP , in a cease and desist letter to Wiki-PR , wrote that “this practice violates the Wikimedia Foundation’s terms of use, including but not limited to Section 4, which prohibits users from engaging in false statements , Impersonation, or fraud ‘, and’ … misrepresenting your affiliation with any individual or entity, or using the username of another user with the intent to deceive ‘. ” [2] In 2014 the Wikimedia Foundation disclose their “employ, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which they receive, or expect to receive, compensation.” [3]

Companies-have argued for Greater leeway in conflict-of-interest editing, Citing Wikipedia: Ignore all rules , a policy, qui states: “If a rule Prevents you from gold Improving Maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it.” [4]

Laws against covert advertising

United States Federal Trade Commission

The Federal Trade Commission has published a guide to the application of the Endorsement Guidelines and Dot Com Disclosures . [5] [6]

European fair trading law

In May 2012 the Munich Oberlandesgericht shortened to a ruling against a company which edited Wikipedia articles with the love of influencing customers. It viewed the edits you practice trading undeclared selon The Act contre unfair Competition Section 4, 3 [7] as it constituted covert advertising, and you Such Were a violation of European fair trading law (see the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive ). The ruling stated that readers can not be expected to seek out user and talk pages to find editors’ disclosures about their corporate affiliation. The case arose out of a claim against a company by a competitor over edits made to the article Weihrauchpräparat on the German Wikipedia. [8] [9]

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in the UK reached a similar decision in June 2012 in relation to Nike on Twitter. The Nike marketing team. “The ASA found that the content of certain tweets from two footballers had been” agreed with the help of a member of the Nike marketing team. ” The tweets were not clearly identified as Nike marketing communications, and were therefore in breach of the ASA’s code. [10]


Jimmy Wales

In December 2005, it was noticed that Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales had edited his own Wikipedia entry. Selon public logs, He Has His biography edited 19 times, [11] as of 9 September 2013, seven times altering information about whether Larry Sanger Was a co-founder of Wikipedia. It was also revealed that Wales had edited the Wikipedia article of his form company, Bomis . “Bomis Babes”, a section of the Bomis website, had been featured in the article as ” soft-core pornography “, Wales goal revised this to “adult content section” and deleted mentions of pornography. Bomis Babes soft porn. Wales conceded that he had made the changes, but maintained that they were technical corrections. [12]

United States Congressional staffers

Main article: United States Congressional staff edits to Wikipedia

In 2006, it was discovered that more than 1,000 changes had been made to Wikipedia. Changes HAD-been made to articles about Representative Marty Meehan , [13] Senator Tom Coburn , Senator Norm Coleman , [14]Representative Gil Gutknecht , [15] Senator Joe Biden , [15] Senator Conrad Burns , [16] Senator Dianne Feinstein , [17] Senator Tom Harkin , [17] Representative David Davis , [18] Tennessee state representative Matthew Hill [18 ] and then-Representative Mike Pence . [20] The edits removed accurate but critical information and embellished positive descriptions. [17] In response to the controversy, certain affected IP addresses were temporarily blocked. [21]

David Rivera ‘s article ,. [22]


Main article: MyWikiBiz

In August 2006 Gregory Kohs, a market researcher from Pennsylvania , founded MyWikiBiz, a company offering to write inexpensive Wikipedia entries for businesses. [23] In January 2007, Kohs Said That In His view Wikipedia’s coverage of major corporations Was deficient, Stating That “It is strange That a minor Pokemon character will get a 1,200-word article, aim a Fortune 500 company will get … Maybe 100 words “. A few days after issuing a press release about his business, Kohs’ Wikipedia account was blocked. Kohs later recalled a phone call with Jimmy Wales who told him MyWikiBiz was “antithetical” to the mission of the encyclopedia. [24] Kohs said it surprised him that PR agencies were discouraged from editing articles:


In January 2007, Australian software engineer Rick Jelliffe revealed that Microsoft had offered to pay him to edit Wikipedia articles on two competing code standards, OpenDocumentFormat and Microsoft Office Open XML . [26] Jelliffe, who has described himself as a technical expert and not an advocate for Microsoft, [27] [28] said he accepted the offer because he wanted the information on technical standards to be accurate. [27]Microsoft subsequently confirmed That It Had to pay offert Jelliffe to edit the items, Stating That They Were seeking “more balance” in the entries, [26] That items contained inaccuracies, [29] Jelliffe’s suggested changes. Also known as Wikipedia. [27]

Heated debate resulted after the revelation over such practices called Wikipedia’s credibility into question. [26] In response to the incident, Jimmy Wales said that it was against the encyclopedia’s spirit. [27] [30] Wales said the better, more transparent choice would have to be for a paper to the white paper on the subject, post it online, and link to it from Wikipedia. [30] He also stated that “although agencies and employees should not edit our pages, they do – but maybe less than you would expect.” [25]

Volunteer Wikipedia spokesperson David Gerard said, “[Wikipedia] tends not to look favorably in terms of conflict of interest, and paying someone is a conflict.” [26] Gerard added that public relations representatives commonly get blocked from editing by Wikipedia administrators. [26]

In the same month, it was decided that, in the future, [25]


Main article: WikiScanner
Then-24-year-old Virgil Griffith invented WikiScanner to “create minor public relations disasters” for companies editing Wikipedia with a conflict of interest.

In 2007 Virgil Griffith, a Caltech computation and neural-systems graduate student, created a searchable database that linked changes made by anonymous Wikipedia editors to companies and organizations. The cross-referenced database logs of Wikipedia edits with Availability of annual records Pertaining to the Internet IP addresses edits Were made from. [31]

Griffith was motivated by the edicts of the United States Congress, and were similarly promoted themselves. He was particularly interested in finding scandals, especially at large and controversial corporations. He said he wanted to, “create minor public relations disasters for companies and organizations. I dislike (and) to see what ‘ [32] He also wanted to give Wikipedia readers a tool to check edits for accuracy [31] and allow the automation and indexing of edits. [33]

Most of the edits Wikiscanner Were found minor or harmless, [31] intended the website to detect mined Was The Most controversial and embarrassing instance of conflict of interest edits. [34] These instances received media coverage worldwide. Included Among the accusé Were the Vatican , [35] [36] the CIA , [31] [36] [37] the Federal Bureau of Investigation , [32] the US Democratic Party’s Congressional Campaign Committee, [36] [38] the US Republican Party , [33] [38] Britain’s Labor Party , The National Rifle Association , [33] News International , [33] Al Jazeera , [48] Bob Jones University , [48] and Ohio State University . [49]

Although the edits have been made with the IP addresses, there was no proof that the changes were made by a member of the organization or employee of the company. [36]

Wikipedia spokespersons received WikiScanner positively, noting that it has helped prevent conflicts of interest from influencing articles [32] as well as increasing transparency [36] and mitigating attempts to remove or distort relevant facts. [33]

In 2008 Griffith released an updated version of WikiScanner called WikiWatcher, which also exploited a common mistake made by users with registered accounts which accidentally forget to log in, revealing their ip address and subsequently their affiliations. [57] As of March 2012 WikiScanner’s website was online, but not functioning. [58]


In 2008 the pro-Israel activist group for Accountability in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA) launched a campaign to alter the Israeli side of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict . The campaign suggested that pro-Israeli editors should pretend to be interested in other topics before elected as administrators. Once administered they were to misuse their administrative powers to suppress pro-Palestinian editors and support pro-Israel editors. [59] Some members of this conspiracy were banned by Wikipedia administrators. [60]

In 2010 two pro- settler Israeli groups, the Yesha Council and Israel Sheli, lancé races to instruct pro-Israel editors is how to use Wikipedia to Promote Israel’s points of view. A prize was to be given to the editor who inserted the most pro-Israel changes. [61]

Church of Scientology

Main article: Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia

In 2008 a long-running dispute between members of the Church of Scientology and Wikipedia editors reached Wikipedia’s arbitration committee. The church members were accused of attempting to sway articles in the church’s interests, while other editors were accused of the opposite. The arbitration committee unanimously voted to block all edits from the IP addresses associated with the church; Several Scientology critics were banned too. [62]

2008 US presidential campaign

During the 2008 US Presidential election , Barack Obama and John McCain ‘s campaigns made the news. [63] A later use Who Claimed to Work for the McCain campaign made to exchange Sarah Palin ‘s item just before the announcement That She Would run for the vice presidency. [64]

Koch brothers use of PR firm

In 2010, Koch Industries began employing New Media Strategies (NMS), an Internet PR firm specializing in word-of-mouth marketing. Shortly Afterwards, It was Discovered That employees of the company, editing from IPs controlled by NMS Were editing the Wikipedia Articles for Charles Koch , David Koch , Political activities of the Koch Brothers , and The Science of Success (a book written by Charles) . Under numerous usernames, NMS employees edited Wikipedia articles “to distance the Koch family from the Tea Party movement, to provide baseless comparisons between Koch and conspiracy theories surrounding George Soros , and to general delete citations to liberal news outlets.

London-based “PR fixer”

In June 2011 PR Weekly report on a “fix”, a known but unnamed London-based figure in the PR industry who offered services to “cleanse” articles. Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Carphone Warehouse co-founder David Ross , Von Essen Group chairman Andrew Davis , British property developer David Rowland , billionaire Saudi tycoon Maan Al-Sanea , and Edward Stanley, 19th Earl of Derby . According to PR Week , 42 edits were made from the same IP address, most of them removing negative or controversial information, or adding positive information. [67]

Bell Pottinger

Main article: Bell Pottinger § Criticism

In December 2011, blogger Tim Ireland, The Independent , and the British Bureau of Investigative Journalism (BIJ) discovered that Bell Pottinger , one of the UK’s largest public relations companies, had manipulated articles on behalf of its clients. [68] Wikipedians discovered up to 19 accounts, 10 of which had over 100 edits each, which traced back to Bell Pottinger’s offices; As a result of the investigation 10 of the accounts were blocked. [69] Bell Pottinger was accused of using sock or meatpuppets to edit pages to create the appearance of support for changes in articles. [70] One of the most noted accounts was registered under the name ” The belligerent is a belligerent and a belligerent, and a belligerent and convicted belligerent . [68] The belligerent is a belligerent and a belligerent, and a belligerent and convicted belligerent . [68]

Undercover BIJ reporters made worries while posing as members of the Uzbek government; Bell Pottinger said that the “dark arts” was the only one of its kind. [68]

Jimmy Wales called Bell Pottinger’s actions “ethical blindness.” [68] Timothy Bell , the chairman, launched an internal review, but disagreed with Wales’ view. He said, “You can destroy someone’s reputation in one minute and it will take years to rebuild,” and continued: “It’s important for Wikipedia to recognize that we are a valuable source for accurate information, -profit what you say is true but that you are a paid advocate for you are lying. ” [71] The head of digital at Bell Pottinger blamed the incident on Wikipedia’s “confusing” editing system and ”

Portland Communications

Main article: Portland Communications § Wikipedia editing

In January 2012, British MP Tom Watson Discovered That Portland Communications HAD beens Removing the nickname of one of ict customers’ products ( “Wife Beater”, referring to Anheuser-Busch InBev ‘s Stella Artois beer) from Wikipedia. Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) CEO Jane Wilson noted, “Stella Artois is on the ‘wife-beater’ page because it is a nick-name in common currency for that brand of strong continental lager. “This article has been translated from French into English.” [73] Other edits from Portland ‘ Portland customer, the Kazakhstan ‘s BTA Bank , and its former head Mukhtar Ablyazov . Wikipedia’s Policies and Guidelines. [74] Portland Communications welcomed CIPR’s next announcement of a collaboration with Wikipedia and invited Jimmy Wales to speak to their company at Bell Pottinger . [75] Tom Watson was optimistic about the collaboration: “PR professionals need clear guidelines in this new world of online-information-sharing.

Newt Gingrich

Around the beginning of 2012, Joe DeSantis, the campaign communications director for American presidential candidate Newt Gingrich , argued for and made changes to Gingrich’s Wikipedia article. [77] Some changes which deSantis requested were minor, but his initial efforts tried to remove negative details which he thought unduly biased the articles, [78] including details about Gingrich’s extramarital affairs, information about his financial expenditure, ethics charges against him, His political positions on controversial issues. [78] [79]

The incident was notable for the DeSantis ‘switch from editing articles about the politician and his wife directly, to following Wikipedia’ conflict of interest guideline by using the linked discussion. He said, “I stopped making direct edits in May 2011 because I was alerted to the COI rules … Has been far more successful and the other editors on Wikipedia have widely received this very positively. ” [79] He told the political journalism organization Politico that his approach of working with the Wikipedia community by discussing edits on talk pages to be more successful than making the changes himself. Wikipedia editor Tvoz was quoted as critical of the practice; She wrote: “… I have to say this micro-managing by a Gingrich campaign director is a matter of concern to me even though you now are identifying yourself. That, even [on a Talk page]. ” [78]

United Kingdom Parliament

In March 2012, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism uncovered that UK MPs or their staff had made almost 10,000 edits to the encyclopedia, and that almost one in six MPs had their Wikipedia article edited from within Parliament. [80] Many of the exchange Dealt with Removing unflattering details from DURING THE 2009 expenses scandal , as well as other controversial issues. [81] [82] Former MP Joan Ryan admitted to changing her entry “whenever there’s misleading or untruthful information [that has] been placed on it.” [81] Clare Short said her staff were “angry and protective” Over mistakes and criticisms in her Wikipedia article and acknowledged they might have made changes to it. [81] Labor MP Fabian Hamilton also reported having one of his assistants edit a page to make it more accurate in his view. MP Philip Davies denied making changes about removing controversial comments related to Muslims from 2006 and 2007. [81]

The Sun newspaper alleged that in 2007 Labor MP Chuka Umunna , under the name Socialdemocrat created and repeatedly edited his own Wikipedia page. The newspaper highlighted edits such as those describing Umunna as the British Barack Obama. [83] Umunna told the Daily Telegraph that he did not have his own Wikipedia page, but the paper quoted what they called “sources close to Umunna” as having told the newspaper that it was possible that his 2007 campaign, When it comes to being a candidate for Streatham in the 2010 general election, set up the page. ” [84]


In September 2012, controversy surrounded Wikimedia UK trustee Roger Bamkin, who along with OCLC Wikipedian in Maximillian Klein Residence, had been organizing an effort named Gibraltarpedia to create articles about Gibraltar in partnership with the Gibraltar Tourism Board. Articles written under this program were featured on the Wikipedia mainpage an unusually high 17 times in the course of a few weeks. [85] [86] This issue has been discussed with organizational conflicts of interest regarding WMUK. [87] Bamkin stepped down as trustee following the media response. [88] Jimmy Wales commented, ”

GEO Group

In February 2013, for-profit jail company GEO Group received a major media coverage when a Wikipedia user under the name Abraham Cohen edited the entry into the company regarding naming rights to Florida Atlantic University (FAU) Stadium. GEO Group’s Manager of Corporate Relations at the time was Abraham Cohen, who is an FAU alumnus, FAU student body president and former member of the FAU board of trustees. [91]Eleven edits constituting the majority of all these changes has been made in a single day under a Wikipedia account named “Abraham Cohen”, the only day on which it has ever been used. [92] [93]


In March 2013 it was reported that BP’s press office had submitted drafts to rewrite the company’s article, including sections dealing with its environmental record; The drafts were reviewed and added by other editors. [94] [95] [96] Estimates of the size of the contributions were as high as 44 percent of the article. [97] The BP press officer, who called himself “Arturo at BP,” said he had chosen that name to make his affiliation clear, and noted that he had not directly edited the page. The development caused concern because the content was being produced by an employee, while “readers would be none of the wiser.” [94] Jimmy Wales was quoted in , saying ” I think that accusing [BP employee] Arturo of ‘skirting’ ‘I think that accusing [BP employee] So, I would Consider That was blatant factual misrepresentation. ” [97] The Wikipedia community Intensely debated the ethics of the incident and how to handle it and other similar cases. [98] [97] The Wikipedia community intensely debated the ethics of the incident and how to handle it and other similar cases. [98] [97] The Wikipedia community intensely debated the ethics of the incident and how to handle it and other similar cases. [98]


Main article: WikiExperts § Terms of Use and conflict of interest guideline

This company affirms that “WikiExperts employees do not directly edit Wikipedia.” Instead, we act as a consulting company which outsources such editing to most suitable affiliated experts. ” [4]


Main article: Wiki-PR editing of Wikipedia

In 2012 Wikipedia lancé Possibly one of the Largest sock puppets investigations in icts history after-editors are icts website Reported suspicious activity Suggesting a number of accounts Were used to subvert Wikipedia’s policies. After almost a year of investigation, over 250 sockpuppet accounts were allegedly found, operated by two independent networks of users. Wikipedia traced the edits and sockpuppetry back to a firm Known As Wiki-PR, leading to a cease and desist letter by Sue Gardner Issued To the founders of the organization. [99] The accounts were banned. Wiki-PR and any of its contractors.


Main article: Orangemoody editing of Wikipedia

In 2015 Wikipedia blocked 381 accounts, many of them suspected sock puppets of the same people, after a two-month investigation, Operation Orangemoody, revealed they had been used to blackmail companies “struggling to get pages about their businesses on Wikipedia. These businesses had been told by Wikipedia users that articles about them had been “rejected due to excessive promotional content.” In a few cases, the users asking for money were the same ones that had previously rejected the articles for publication. [100]

The scammers for “protecting or promoting” the companies’ interests. Wikipedia deleted 210 articles related to UK businesses, most of them of middle size. Individuals were also targeted. The investigation was named OrangeMoody by Wikipedia editors after the name of the first identified account. An unnamed Wikipedia spokesperson stated that “undisclosed paid advocacy editing may represent a serious conflict of interest and could compromise the quality of content on Wikipedia.” [100]

Irish former Senator Jim Walsh

In September 2015 Jim Walsh Admitted editing his own Wikipedia entry, claiming it had been edited by “a person from the gay lobby groups”. [101] He said that he had removed “certain erroneous comments” but did not say which edits he made. [101] TJ McIntyre, a law lecturer at University College Dublin drew attention to edicts made from an IP address belonging to the Oireachtas . [101] Edits made from That address included removal of controversial comments made by the form senator about gay people or the Marriage Equality referendum . [101]

2017 Burger King

On April 12, 2017, Burger King released a business in which he could not explain to a guest who would not be able to explain what happened. The dialogue was designed to trigger voice searches on Android devices and Google Home smart speakers configured to automatically respond to the phrase “OK Google”. [102] The specific query causes the device to read a snippet sourced from Wikipedia ‘s article on the Whopper. However, prior to the advent of the first, the article had been edited by users, including one named “Burger King Corporation”, so that Google ‘ S automatically-generated response to the query would be a detailed description of the Whoop Burger that utilized promotional language. The edits were reverted for violating Wikipedia’s policies against blatant promotion. [103] [104]

Furthermore, the snippet est devenu the target of vandals , Who edited the section to claim que le sandwich contained Such ingredients as ” cyanide “, “a medium-sized child ,” “rat meat” and “toenail clippings”, while Some users Reported That Google Home had relayed information from these vandalized revisions. [105] [106] [102] Soon after the release of the commercial, Google blacklisted its audio so that it would not trigger the always-on voice detection. Wikipedia also protected the re-inserted. [105] In turn, Burger King The Burger King [107]


In September 2007, Prince Johan Friso and his wife Princess Mabel of the Netherlands, were traced back to their palace. [108]

In April 2008 Phorm deleted material related to a controversy over its advertising deals. [109]

In September 2012, there was a bit of media attention in the two Wikipedia employees who were running a PR on the side and editing Wikipedia on behalf of their clients. [110]

Edits involving Daimler AG were reported in March 2012. [111] In August that year, the communications director for Idaho’s Department of Education, Melissa McGrath, edited the article on her boss Tom Luna . [92] In September it was revealed that Tory Party charmain Grant Shapps had changed the information about his academic record as well as donor information. [113] Also in September, writer Philip Roth wrote a piece in The New Yorker chronicling his difficulty changing information about his novels. [114] [115]

In October 2012, the Occupy Melbourne was edited from a City of Melbourne by Robert Doyle . Doyle denied any involvement or motive. [116]

In November, Finsbury , the firm led by Roland Rudd , was found to have anonymously edited the article about Alisher Usmanov , removing information about various controversies. [117]

In January 2014, the Wikimedia Foundation announced that Sarah Stierch was “no longer an employee of the Wikimedia Foundation”, after evidence was presented on Wikimedia. Foundation said was “frowned upon by many in the editing community and by the Wikimedia Foundation”. [118] [119] [120]

In June 2014, the Wall Street Journal reported that Binary Bench , which had been cited for unregistered trading options by US regulators, posted an “offering more than $ 10,000 for ‘crisis management'” of its Wikipedia page. [121]

In March 2015, The Washington Post Reported That The New York Police Department confirmed HAD That au moins Some edits to Wikipedia entries about people Who died Following confrontations with NYPD officers Were made from computers on the department’s servers. [122]


Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement

Phil Gomes, Senior Vice President of a PR firm named Edelman Digital, created a Facebook group called “Corporate Representatives for Ethical Wikipedia Engagement” (CREWE) in January 2012. [123] According to Gerard F. Corbett, Society of America, CREWE is based on four principles: 1) Corporate communicators want to do the right thing; 2) communicators engaged in ethical practices have a lot to contribute; 3) current Wikipedia policy is not fully understood numbers 1 and 2, because of the activities of some bad actors and a misunderstanding of public relations; And 4) accurate Wikipedia entries are in the public interest. [124]

CREWE lobbies for greater involvement by PR professionals on the site, with the stated goal of maintaining accurate articles about corporations. Some Wikipedia editors, including Jimmy Wales, joined the group to discuss these issues. [125] In an open letter to Wales, Gomes argued that Wikipedia ‘s prominence as a result of the. Gomes also criticized alleged inaccurate or outdated articles and the lack of timely response to issues raised in existing channels. He is arguing that allowing PR representatives to fix minor errors, such as spelling, grammar and facts, leaves too much ambiguity about what are acceptable changes to make. He made the comparison between PR editors and activists, “much more latitude, And argued that in certain situations direct editing of articles by PR reps was called for. [126]


Gerald Corbett, head of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) argued in June 2012 for greater access to Wikipedia for PR reps. [127] The Chartered Institute of Public Relations (CIPR) in the United Kingdom. (CIPR) to provide guidance for CIPR members on how to interact with the Wikipedia community. [128] Jane Wilson, IPRC CEO, said: “For the time being, we have not changed this overnight but by Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

International Association of Business Communicators

The International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) devoted their September 2012 CW Bulletin to paid editing on Wikipedia. [129] As a voice of social conscience, however, a public relations professional is accountable to the public at large. THUS, the innate conflict entre les two identities. The theory of responsible advocacy Attempts to Reconcile That conflict and Provide guidance to accomplish achieve common ground. [130] PR professional David King recommended “collaborating with nothing to hide,” Emphasizing transparency and the importance of Not editing articles directly He explained: ” When legal and marketing departments suit les Their corporate Wikipedia strategy or policy, They Often Feel They Are faced with only two choices: Ignore one of the world’s Most Influential websites with a hands-off policy or engages in the risky, controversial and Ethically ambiguous practice of Direct editing. In Some Circumstances thesis Both are Good strategies, effective goal MOST companies can find more middle ground by Engaging in PR gold content marketing with Wikipedia’s citizen journalists-a safe and ethical way to make improvements That Is Both valuable for the organization and Wikipedia. [131] Controversial and ethically ambiguous practice of direct editing. In this article, we present the results of the study of the social and economic development of the city. [131] Controversial and ethically ambiguous practice of direct editing. In this article, we present the results of the study of the social and economic development of the city. [131]

WikiProject Cooperation and WikiProject Integrity

On 6 January 2012, a Wikipedian created WikiProject Integrity (formerly WikiProject Paid Advocacy Watch). [132] The goal of this Wikiproject is to “discuss, raise awareness of, and hopefully address issues regarding paid editing on Wikipedia, in which people are compensated to create and edit Wikipedia articles.” [133]

Days later, on January 10, another editor created WikiProject Cooperation ; Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search [134] The group is made up of both paid and volunteer Wikipedia editors. [134] The group provides “education and outreach to public relations and marketing professionals, freelance editors, and employees working on assignments from their employers” with the goal of “support [ing] ethical, transparent paid editors that opt-in to collaborative efforts To meet Wikipedia’s encyclopedic goals, serve the public’s interest and avoid the perception of impropriety. ” The main avenue for accomplishing its goals is a paid editor help page, ……………. Ed by an experienced editor. [135] WikiProject Cooperation echoes the COI guideline in strongly discouraging paid editors from making direct edits to articles. [134]

2014 statement by 11 PR companies

In June 2014, 11 major public relations companies signed a statement agreeing to comply with Wikipedia’s policies on conflict-of-interest editing. [136]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *