Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry/Employees

Paid editing is generally not allowed on Wikipedia, as it is generally a form of WP:Sock puppetry. Wikipedia is written by people who voluntarily decide how much time to devote to each topic, as a personal contribution. Employees of a corporation assigned to edit Wikipedia are doing so as puppets on its behalf, giving it undue influence. This may be true even if a company has only a single public relations editor assigned, because the transfer of funds from a wealthy sponsor to employee can greatly amplify the amount of effort applied above the level of commitment the true originator of the impulse possessed. Even if a company or enterprise is made up of just a single individual who edits on his own behalf, his contributions are subject to WP:COI, which should be contiguous with this policy.

The definition of paid editing by employees is broad and merges with other conceptions of improper sock puppetry by proxy and point of view editing. It includes owners, employees and contractors, even if they are not working on company time or using company facilities, if they expect to receive tangible recognition or advantage for their efforts - i.e. if other people have any say in what they write. When the advantage is less tangible, such as for faculty boosters of a public university's sports team, WP:POV still applies.

Rights of the employer
Employers do have a self-evident right that allows them to create material that is likely to end up on Wikipedia: they can release text, web pages, and multimedia files under a CC-by-SA-3.0 license. This includes the right to hire people to create Wikitext with features, such as effective CSS formatting and template usage, that make it ideal for inclusion in relevant Wikipedia articles. This may be maintained on their own site or Wiki so that it is available to researchers, and can also be proposed on talk pages (see below)

Though it may not be obvious to newcomers, Wikipedia's username policy WP:ORGNAME, which prohibits accounts from holding corporate names, serves to protect the right of employers to their name and trademark. Because employees edit as individuals, any name they register would remain theirs to control even if they are dismissed from employment, so this policy prevents them from misrepresenting their companies in the future.

Rights of the employee
Wikipedia should strongly encourage employers to acknowledge rights for their employees, most notably their right not to violate Wikipedia policy. This is proposed at WP:Paid editor's bill of rights.

Talk page requests
Wikipedia generally allows people more latitude to share leads about possible article content on talk pages. Therefore, we have allowed people doing commercial editing to post suggested edits to the talk pages for specific articles (the edit COI template is of use there) and to noticeboards, provided they disclose their conflict of interest.

Non-commercial editing
The conflict of interest guideline distinguishes between paid editing that creates a conflict of interest from paid editing that does not. When editors receive remuneration to edit Wikipedia in a general, non-partisan way, this need not be improper, as their viewpoint and interests remain their own. Examples of acceptable paid editing include accepting remuneration as a Wikipedian-in-residence, translator, or impartial reviewer, or similar scholarly work.

Extenuating circumstances
WP:COISELF provides an exception for reverting vandalism or removing clear violations of the biography of living persons policy, but directs to follow it up at WP:OTRS or WP:BLPN. It is better to ask for outside help, as you should not need to carry the burden of monitoring your article.

Requesting help
Subjects, including people, businesses and groups, have an interest to ensure that their articles are accurate and up to date. If you are concerned about how you are presented on Wikipedia, please contact us to request help. Rest assured that all inquiries are handled swiftly.

Violations of Wikipedia policy by non-editors
It is possible for persons who have never edited Wikipedia to create problems to which Wikipedia may respond specifically. For example, a comedian may urge his viewers to vandalize a specific article. For such cases, of course, blocks and bans are no option, but responses such as stricter patrolling and article protection may be useful. Wikipedia users also have the right to speak out against companies that bias article content, and such items have frequently made news headlines.

If you see advertisements offering paid Wikipedia article writing services, know that these services violate Wikipedia's policies. Before hiring any of these services, you should ask yourself: do you really want to hire a rule-breaker and risk the potential embarrassment?