User talk:Moviemaverick

Welcome!
Hello, Moviemaverick, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Endercase (talk) 20:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

A few questions
First of all, this is working under a few assumptions that are not provable. And it is weird. Revert if you want.

From your edit history it appears as if you aren't really a new user. I would like to understand why you use a (sock?) account like this. I know this doesn't fit the wikipedia definition (local consensus?) of sock as you are not using it to alter the appearance of consensus or engage in edit wars. I am not here trying to say you are using wikipedia wrong. I just want to understand why you are using it in such a non-standard way.

If you were making a sock account to edit film articles why use the word movie in your username? You would think that others might interpret that as a COI and as such you should avoid that sort of use. Do you actually just like movies/shows? Maybe that is the point of that then, to misdirect the appearance of COI, to look like a fan instead of a worker.

One explanation of your behavior is that you are compensated editor and you are trying to separate your compensated edits from your real ones. Personally I don't really care if you are compensated. I just care about the quality of your articles. So far the one you made on this account seems legit and as such I don't have a problem with it, I mean you are just adding referenced information that other users might find valuable. The main concerns, that I have gathered, with paid editors is that 1) they have more time to push POV (paid) 2) they have incentive to push POV (contract sometimes) 3) they work by a different set of !rules and often do things that are explicitly forbidden by policy (to "get the job done")

The main thing is that it isn't like wikipedia can really stop compensated editing like this, their only recourse would be to require (game-able) verified identities or instil some sort of (game-able) class based system and those could both suppress huge swaths of valuable information and devalue the process of consensus. So while some are calling for that I don't really think that will really go anywhere.

I really would just like your take on this issue (no matter who you are), as it is widely debated yet it feels like (to me) a significant portion of the POV on the issue is missing from the real debate.

How do you think unpaid Wikipedia and paid wikipedia should work together in such a way that both parties are happy?

Thank you for your time, Endercase (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:06, 29 March 2017 (UTC)