Considering the purpose of wikidata, it might make sense for it to have
somewhat different rules also. Unlike Wikipedia, it is a directory

On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 12:56 PM, James Heilman <jmh...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The terms of use as explained on meta apply to all projects unless an
> alternative is in place. So sister projects do have similar restrictions on
> undisclosed paid editing.
>
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Terms_of_use#4._Refraining_from_Certain_
> Activities
>
> Different projects of course have varied degrees of enforcement of the TOU.
> Italian WP did delete the article in question a couple of times
> https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/AvaTrade
>
> James
>
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Gabriel Thullen <gabr...@thullen.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I agree wholeheartedly with Vito. Thank you for bringing up this issue.
> > Wikidata is part of the umbrella group of Wikimedia projects. Wikipedia
> has
> > strict rules governing paid editing (at least in EN), and these rules are
> > not even the same across different language editions.
> > Most of the other projects do not have such rules. Wikimedia Commons, for
> > example. Most of us know what product placement is. Do certain
> contributors
> > earn their living from it? Why don't these "sister" projects have similar
> > restrictions on paid contributions?
> >
> > Gabe
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Vi to <vituzzu.w...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We currently have some mean to fight paid editing, terms of services
> are
> > > "easy to violate" thus giving us a straightforward way to take action.
> > But
> > > too often I see something like: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
> Q16826370
> > > obvious paid editors left totally free to do their job without even
> > > attracting some attention on them.
> > >
> > > Vito
> > >
> > > 2017-04-23 13:58 GMT+02:00 Peter Southwood <
> peter.southw...@telkomsa.net
> > >:
> > >
> > > > I would think this is up to the chapter/affilate organisation, but no
> > > harm
> > > > in getting a more universal collection of opinions.
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >  Peter
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Wikimedia-l [mailto:wikimedia-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org]
> On
> > > > Behalf Of Gabriel Thullen
> > > > Sent: Sunday, 23 April 2017 10:50 AM
> > > > To: Wikimedia Mailing List
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] [arbcom-l] Where is WMF with pursuing
> > > companies
> > > > that offer paid editing services
> > > >
> > > > I suggest another question, right after your #5. Undisclosed paid
> > editing
> > > > is one thing, dealing with disclosed paid editors within our
> community
> > is
> > > > another. You could add the following question:
> > > > "Asking if we agree to let disclosed paid editors occupy key
> positions
> > > > within the Wikimedia movement such as chapter board, official chapter
> > > > spokesperson, affiliate organization board, etc."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 6:16 AM, James Salsman <jsals...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I've proposed asking wikimedians at large what they think should be
> > > > > done about paid advocacy editing, as item number 5 on my periodic
> > > > > survey proposal composed of all the unresolved questions over the
> > last
> > > > > quarter on this list at:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:James_Salsman#
> > > > > Periodic_survey_prototype
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:50 PM Pine W <wiki.p...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Has there been a recent substantial discussion by the community
> > > > > > surrounding
> > > > > > > promotional/biased editting paid or otherwise, which had an
> > > > > > > outcome resulting in a specific request for assistance or
> > > > > > > increased action by
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > WMF?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Aside from the conversation on this list, I'm aware of the
> > > > > > discussion on Jimbo's talk page. If WMF Legal or the WMF Board
> > wants
> > > > > > to take the
> > > > > position
> > > > > > that it would like to see a community RfC or some other such
> > > > > > discussion,
> > > > > I
> > > > > > imagine that such can be arranged, and I can see how that might
> be
> > > > > > beneficial. Of course, anyone is free to initiate such an on-wiki
> > > > > > discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If there hasn't, I do not see grounds for you to be expecting
> an
> > > > > official
> > > > > > > response from Legal to a list whose conversation has for the
> most
> > > > > > > part consisted of about 6 people?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'm not sure why you would be telling other people to whom they
> can
> > > > > > initiate requests and the conditions under which they can be
> made.
> > I
> > > > > > already have a dim view of WMF's customer service; please don't
> dig
> > > > > > the hole any deeper.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many others, I am sure, would rightly complain if the Foundation
> > > > > > > unilaterally made decisions in this area.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is possible if WMF were to do something particularly novel,
> so
> > > > > > your sense of caution here is well taken. I would hope that WMF
> > > > > > would discuss its plans with the community and have a
> conversation
> > > > > > before actually initiating novel actions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > But please be realistic, this is
> > > > > > > a coffee table discussion.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have mixed views on this. Wikimedia-l is not a quiet back room
> > > > > > with
> > > > > only
> > > > > > a few people around, but it's true that a consensus here among a
> > > > > > small number of people who speak up in a particular discussion
> > > > > > demonstrates a lower level of consensus than an RfC with hundreds
> > of
> > > > > > participants. It's not clear to me that there is consensus on
> which
> > > > > > tools are appropriate
> > > > > for
> > > > > > which exact circumstances, and some discussions happen in
> multiple
> > > > > venues.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > The views expressed here are valid but the right
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > thing to do would be to further the conversation on wiki and
> have a
> > > > > proper
> > > > > > > community conversation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't think that there is a single definition of a "proper"
> > > > > > community conversation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have no objection to having an on-wiki RfC (and I can see how a
> > > > > > sophisticated and well-attended one might produce detailed
> guidance
> > > > > > that would be helpful), but neither do I want this thread to be
> > > > trivialized.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Pine
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > > Unsubscribe:
> > > > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> > unsubscribe>
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> > mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=
> unsubscribe>
> > > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > > -----
> > > > No virus found in this message.
> > > > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> > > > Version: 2016.0.8013 / Virus Database: 4769/14365 - Release Date:
> > > 04/23/17
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/
> mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> > wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> >
>
>
>
> --
> James Heilman
> MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
>
> The Wikipedia Open Textbook of Medicine
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
>



-- 
David Goodman

DGG at the enWP
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DGG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to