I think continued monitoring of an article by a skilled PR operative would result in an informative, well-referenced article, which notes, but does not dwell on negative aspects. As noted, such an effort would have to integrated with our usual editing patterns.
Here's the question: If you can't tell it's PR, is there anything wrong with it? Fred > They may presume that the presence of stuff that hasn't yet been > de-pufferied (I made that word up) means that what they write will > stay. But the key point is lack of control. If you put something on > Wikipedia, you cannot control the content and that is what a lot of > people fail to understand. It becomes part of the wiki-editing > process, which at its best produces great stuff, and at its worst > produces some rather bad stuff. > > Carcharoth > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> > wrote: >> That's right. It isn't that we don't want an article and a skilled PR >> editor ought to be able to write an article the average editor could >> not >> tell was written by a PR person. The clue to bad work is lifting stuff >> from the company's website. And, of course, the complete absence of any >> negative information, however notorious. >> >> Fred >> >>> A PR agent should be able to learn how to write a neutral article, if >>> they see one aspect of their role as to provide information about >>> their client, not necessarily to directly promote them. In the fields >>> I work in, I have frequently worked with PR staff, and about half of >>> them have proved open to learning a new medium. (The basic >>> instruction I give them is to write a dull an article as possible, >>> remove all possible adjectives, use the minimum number of words, give >>> the name of the company only once, list nobody but the successive >>> CEOs, provide specific sourced numbers about market share, and give >>> no contact information beyond the principal web site.) And when I see >>> a promotional article for a notable company, if I have the time i >>> neither delete nor blank it, but rewrite it according to my just those >>> instructions. >>> >>> And if we had a systematic campaign to provide basic information about >>> all companies that meet our notabiliity requirements, the way we do >>> for populated places, it would greatly diminish the tendency for >>> people to think they needed to write their own article. >>> >>> David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. >>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> This article makes my week. >>>> >>>> I generally feel we should blank articles more and delete them less, >>>> but this is an area where the explicit rebuff of deletion has its >>>> advantages. >>>> >>>> SJ >>>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Durova <nadezhda.dur...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Excellent piece. Especially the close about how it's a difficult >>>>> position >>>>> for PR professionals to report to the client that the article was >>>>> deleted. >>>>> >>>>> -Durova >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 1:35 PM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> http://rushprnews.com/2010/03/31/pr-consultants-should-think-twice-before-using-wikipedia-to-promote-clients >>>>>> >>>>>> PR consultants should think twice before using Wikipedia to promote >>>>>> clients >>>>>> March 31, 2010 >>>>>> >>>>>> Leicestershire, UK (RPRN) 03/31/10 PR consultants are being >>>>>> advised >>>>>> to think twice before incorporating Wikipedia entries into campaign >>>>>> strategies after the site started cracking down on articles >>>>>> submitted >>>>>> by any public relations agency it considered to be using its >>>>>> resource >>>>>> to promote clients. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> (muwahaha. Spotted by Mathias Schindler. The article sets out >>>>>> en:wp's >>>>>> rationales and likely actions very well indeed.) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - d. >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list >>>>>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://durova.blogspot.com/ >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> WikiEN-l mailing list >>>>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> WikiEN-l mailing list >>>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> WikiEN-l mailing list >>> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >>> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> WikiEN-l mailing list >> WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l >> > > _______________________________________________ > WikiEN-l mailing list > WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org > To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l > _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l