Thanks for the additional info; I'm familiar with the history. My point is that - for whatever reason - the CIPR guidelines are stricter than Wikipedia's own, and we need to be mindful of that.
On 15 November 2012 10:58, Stevie Benton <stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk> wrote: > Thanks for your email Andy. I've already requested they correct that error. > > With regards to your point about COI editing - the guidelines the CIPR refer > to were developed with WMUK, some Wikipedians and some people from CIPR and > PRCA. The development took place on the WMUK Wiki and was widely shared and > people were encouraged to participate. > > Regardless of whether there is a total prohibition on editing article spaces > directly in EN:WP policy, we have seen (many, many times) that when PR > professionals directly edit article space bad things happen. Even if edits > are benign and factual, if it comes to light that they were made directly by > PRs acting on behalf of a client, nobody wins and a COI is automatically > assumed by many. It's not good for trust in Wikipedia, it's not good for the > PR industry and it's not good for their clients. > > If you'd like some more background on the development of the guidance, a > good place to start is at > http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Draft_best_practice_guidelines_for_PR > > Thanks, > > Stevie > > > > On 15 November 2012 10:51, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote: >> >> On 15 November 2012 10:09, Stevie Benton <stevie.ben...@wikimedia.org.uk> >> wrote: >> >> > PR Week have published another story on this - >> > http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/1159715/wikipedia-defends-editing-processes-following-finsbury-clean-up/ >> >> They have you as "Wikipedia [with a "p"] UK comms organiser". is >> suspect we may never win that battle. >> >> I note that it is claimed (and I don't doubt) that the "CIPR [...] >> guidance for PROs [is that] they should not directly edit Wikipedia >> pages relating to their organisation or a client". I should like >> people to be mindful that that's not what en.Wikipedia's CoI guidance >> says; there has never been consensus for a total prohibition (though I >> acknowledge that some feel strongly that there should be). >> >> -- >> Andy Mabbett >> @pigsonthewing >> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia UK mailing list >> wikimediau...@wikimedia.org >> http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l >> WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > > > > > -- > > Stevie Benton > Communications Organiser > Wikimedia UK > +44 (0) 20 7065 0993 / +44 (0) 7803 505 173 > @StevieBenton > > Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and > Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered > Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT. > United Kingdom. Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia > movement. The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who > operate Wikipedia, amongst other projects). > > Wikimedia UK is an independent non-profit charity with no legal control over > Wikipedia nor responsibility for its contents. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia UK mailing list > wikimediau...@wikimedia.org > http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l > WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org > -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediau...@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
