 | Please refer to the Wikipedia policy on paid contributions atWikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure (WP:PAID). |
 | This is afailed proposal. Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please usethe talk page or initiate a thread atthe village pump. |
Paid editing is editing Wikipedia in return forpayment. Although there may be some forms of compensation that are generally acceptable, such as theWikipedia reward board, there are other forms that are considered unacceptable. Exceptions such asThe Google Medicine project should be seen as community sanctioned.
Wikipedia utilizesconsensus to build and maintain the project.Advocacy andconflict of interest editing, is considered against consensus and may result inblocks and evenbanning from Wikipedia. Acknowledging that it is hard to tell if an editor is "paid" or not, a consistent discussion point is that generally, Wikipedia should avoidencouraging paid editing. Adon't ask don't tell approach is often employed for editors who are otherwise not causing problems. Unless an editor discloses that they are paid,good faith assumptions erode when handling potential problems with their editing or behavior.
| Conduct policies |
|---|
| Wikipedia copyright |
|---|
| Policy |
| Guidelines |
| Advice |
| Processes |
| Resources |
Paid editing issues remain subject to divided discussions, particularly an extensivecommunity-wide request for comment in June 2009. Some users feel that forms of paid editing have always taken place and remain acceptable if the contributions align with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines on content and contributing. Other users support forbidding paid editing altogether, based on the belief that it invitesbiased contributions and creates more work for the project than it saves.Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has previously blocked editors,[1] and stated his support for blocking editors who set up anediting service. He added that people wishing to offer their writing and research skills should publish their work elsewhere, and freely license the work allowing Wikipedians to add it as they deemed appropriate.
Paid editing, broadly construed, is any editing where an editor is being compensated in some way, e.g. employees and contractors for money, students earning a grade and course credit such asWikipedia:School and university projects, recognition from social and business associates, Wikipedians atWikipedia:Bounty board, in-trade compensation, etc. The issues of paid editing tend to focus on the problems rather than any benefits, if someone makes constructive contributions the edits will likely be kept regardless if the editor is seen as being "paid." Edits that introduce bias, and unverifiable claims, as well as remove notable and sourced critical content, will likely be reverted.
There is stated opposition to Wikipedians setting up an "editing service" and there have traditionally been similar concerns about companies who advertise for someone towrite an article about them on Wikipedia. There is also general opposition topromotional editing of any kind. However, efforts to ban the practice are seen as driving some editors underground rather than stopping it.[2] Practical methods to prohibit promotional efforts, like addingpromotional links to aSpam blacklist, do not effectively address alladvertorial content which often has to handled case-by-case as some of the edits are supported in policy asnotable subjects withverifiable claims inreliable sources.[3] This material may have to be fixed instead. In the community, RfC a view held by several editors and articulated byiridescent's statement maintained that if paid editing was out in the open, then the usual editing processes would take care of anything egregious.[4]
Any form ofadvocacy (that is, any contribution or edit to Wikipedia content that advocates apoint of view) are forbidden byWP:NPOV. Significant information and widely held opinions that are documented in reliable sources which are contrary to your point of view or business interestsmust be included. Wales stated that he felt paidadvocates should contribute to articles by way of the articles' talkpages.
The guideline onconflicts of interest (COI) must be observed at all times.Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest. When someone is being compensated, the integrity of the work, including the likelihood that the content remains neutral toward those who are doing the compensating, is reasonably considered to be compromised. Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged to declare their interests, both on their user pages and on the talk page of any article they edit, particularly if those edits may be contested. Misuse ofadministrator tools to make COI edits is considered a gross violation of community trust. (See alsoWikipedia:Administrator Code of Conduct.)
Policies that are believed germane to paid editing most likely to lead to problems include:
If you are engaging in paid editing or dealing with what might be considered a paid editing situation, please keep the following advice in mind:
If you are uncertain about whether your contribution is appropriate, you can begin by creating the article as a user subpage. To do this, visityour user page and then add to the URL a slash ("/") followed by the name of the subpage (alternativelyclick here). You can then request feedback on your subpage from more experienced users before using the "Move" feature to move it to its correct title.