Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2006-10-09/MyWikiBiz

Don't know if you want to mention that deletion review concluded keep.

Relevant personal essays on the issue of being paid to edit Wikipedia include User:Jmabel/PR and User:LinaMishima/PaidEditing. -- llywrch 19:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
 * "Meanwhile, several more of the articles posted on MyWikiBiz.com were copied over by other editors after the situation flared up again." - Can someone please point out what articles these were? Could the author please provide links?  This is exactly why WP:COI in its current form just doesn't work.  I have absolutely no idea how to track them, so far I only know of Arch Coal and The Family & Workplace Connection. - Hahnch  e  n 04:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I didn't provide links because I have little confidence about whether the articles will still exist going forward. However, you can certainly go to MyWikiBiz.com and find their list of wikified articles and start checking against Wikipedia. Note that I did not check all of the list, only enough to confirm that this was happening, and also some of the companies already had Wikipedia articles before, and their content wasn't produced by MyWikiBiz. --Michael Snow 05:43, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I did check the MyWikiBiz website, but that's just making a mockery of the current procedure right now, as there are also listed articles which have been on Wikipedia for ages, and new articles, which we don't know whether he actually authored. Do you have links to any of the debates? - Hahnch  e  n 15:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Slightly misleading
The sentence "The article was ultimately kept." is slightly misleading as it is not a complete statement of the conclusion. The conclusion given here was "Subject notable, article completely rewritten to avoid conflict of interest issues.". Carcharoth 12:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * No it was kept. As with any Wiki article it'll undergo improvement and additions, but MyWikiBiz's seed germ article still remains. - Hahnch  e  n 15:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Those paying for ed. services must realize that there is no necessary reason to think that the article will reflect their desired view. Whatever the paid ed. writes is always subject to community editing. A business may pay for an article, and the article may in the end prove that it is, for example, a diploma mill.
 * As an extension of this, paid eds. & their subjects also must realize that they have no right to insist the article be withdrawn, DGG 20:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)