Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
7 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

David Gerard-2
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2007/04/linguists-go-wikipedia.html

Now ... is this a useful thing the Foundation can work to actively
encourage? Sponsorship of a student to write LOTS AND LOTS on
Wikipedia, from a suitable sponsoring organisation?


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

Gerard Meijssen-3
Hoi ,
When you read what the student will be paid for, it will be the coordination
of the effort to update Wikipedia by the linguists who are subscribed to the
linguist list. So the plan is to have these individual people work on their
subject. Linguistics.... Oh and please assume good faith ...

I think it is absolutely great :)

Thanks,
     GerardM

On 4/10/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2007/04/linguists-go-wikipedia.html
>
> Now ... is this a useful thing the Foundation can work to actively
> encourage? Sponsorship of a student to write LOTS AND LOTS on
> Wikipedia, from a suitable sponsoring organisation?
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

Walter van Kalken
In reply to this post by David Gerard-2
This is nothing new I proposed it years ago. And Guaka has already done
something like this.

Waerth

>http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2007/04/linguists-go-wikipedia.html
>
>Now ... is this a useful thing the Foundation can work to actively
>encourage? Sponsorship of a student to write LOTS AND LOTS on
>Wikipedia, from a suitable sponsoring organisation?
>
>
>- d.
>
>_______________________________________________
>foundation-l mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
>
>
>  
>

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

Robert S. Horning
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
GerardM wrote:

> Hoi ,
> When you read what the student will be paid for, it will be the coordination
> of the effort to update Wikipedia by the linguists who are subscribed to the
> linguist list. So the plan is to have these individual people work on their
> subject. Linguistics.... Oh and please assume good faith ...
>
> I think it is absolutely great :)
>
> Thanks,
>      GerardM
>
> On 4/10/07, David Gerard <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2007/04/linguists-go-wikipedia.html
>>
>> Now ... is this a useful thing the Foundation can work to actively
>> encourage? Sponsorship of a student to write LOTS AND LOTS on
>> Wikipedia, from a suitable sponsoring organisation?
>>
>>
>> - d.
>>    

I disagree with some of the scathing hatred that some people, especially
on en.wikipedia, have toward getting paid for editing content on
Wikimedia projects.  Sometimes it does go a little bit too far when a
P.R. rep goes and polishes up an article that is clearly not NPOV, or
adds information about each subsidiary and product as brand new
articles, as well as articles about each member of their board of
directors.  Perhaps that is useful, but it can strain the level of
notability at times.

I do think that for some historical information, as long as it is done
with the standard 5 pillars in mind and care is done as well, should not
be discouraged as readily as it currently is right now.  I wouldn't
advocate the WMF to directly pay for any content editing (WMF employees
should do content development on their own time off the clock and for
pleasure like the rest of us), but if a scholarly society or
organization such as a museum or university wants to help "fill in the
gaps" of Wikipedia with a student internship, what real harm is there?  
It would be a good way for somebody to polish up on their writing skills
and do quite a bit of good on a number of neglected subjects.  Imagine
the support that could come from an automobile museum that would help
add details on historic automobiles and bring in some references from
books they have in the private library of the curator or others there at
the musuem.

Certainly it is wise to urge caution when this is done, and if somebody
suggests they are getting paid even part-time to write content for
Wikipedia or other Wikimedia projects, they should be very familiar with
project policies before they start making huge changes, and they should
respect the volunteer contributors as peers.

Related to this is a phenomena on Wikibooks where several books have
been started as class projects under the direction of a university
professor.  The student participation in these projects is not for
money, but they do "earn" a grade and college credit.  That to me is
nearly the same thing.  A good example of this can be found here:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Instructional_Technology

Prior to their participation in this project, nearly all of the
participants usually are completely unfamiliar with Wikimedia projects
or even Wiki editing at all.  They are learning about the topic first
hand, and some of the participants even reach out to some of the other
content pages on Wikibooks as well, once they are involved.  This is a
common enough situation that specific guidelines have been written to
help instructors get the help they need on class projects like this:

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Wikibooks:Guidelines_for_class_projects

This page is even referenced on the "Main Page" of Wikibooks, so it
isn't too hard to find.  I would say if a project does create some paid
editing guidelines, they should be something similar to this one about
class projects and be of a generally encouraging tone but also warning
about potential problems that may show up as well.

-- Robert Horning

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by Walter van Kalken
On 10/04/07, Walter van Kalken <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This is nothing new I proposed it years ago. And Guaka has already done
> something like this.


Absolutely. I'm saying that I'm glad to see it and that there should
be more of it :-)


- d.

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

Andrew Gray
In reply to this post by Gerard Meijssen-3
On 10/04/07, GerardM <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hoi ,
> When you read what the student will be paid for, it will be the coordination
> of the effort to update Wikipedia by the linguists who are subscribed to the
> linguist list. So the plan is to have these individual people work on their
> subject. Linguistics.... Oh and please assume good faith ...

Yeah. It's a little unclear quite what this person will end up doing -
lots and lots of to-do lists and coordination and so on, I guess. a
paid project coordinator :-)

--
- Andrew Gray
  [hidden email]

_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Paid editing on en:wp ... the way it should be done

Mark
In reply to this post by Robert S. Horning
Robert Horning wrote:
> I disagree with some of the scathing hatred that some people, especially
> on en.wikipedia, have toward getting paid for editing content on
> Wikimedia projects.  Sometimes it does go a little bit too far when a
> P.R. rep goes and polishes up an article that is clearly not NPOV, or
> adds information about each subsidiary and product as brand new
> articles, as well as articles about each member of their board of
> directors.  Perhaps that is useful, but it can strain the level of
> notability at times.
>  

While I agree that this has happened, I thought I'd also point out that
some of these paid editors have produced good content, and have stopped
some of their problematic editing when it's been explained to them why
it wasn't consistent with our goals.  In particular, I've seen good (and
referenced!) edits to our articles on academic journals from employees
of the journal publisher, which is an area we have pretty bad coverage
of currently.  Employees of museums have also been quite good in general.

-Mark


_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l