If you know of any examples, you can leave them on my blog, or perhaps there's even a wiki page somewhere for this?
[[ http://reagle.org/joseph/blog/social/wikipedia/goldman-labor-squeeze ... Second, Goldman characterizes Wikipedia as atypical in rejecting contributions from paid/professional content creators. He is conflating the conflict of interest policy with the means of production. Yes, free and open source developers are often paid for their work, and while this hasn't taken off at Wikipedia (the market/incentives are different), I am not aware of any Wikipedia policy that prohibits the adoption of professionally produced content if it is appropriate to the encyclopedia and under a compatible license. However, Wikipedia is rightfully careful about contributors who edit articles about their own financial or reputational interests. This is the difference between incorporating content written by a paid expert on their topic of expertise, and rejecting their edits to their own biography. So, on this note, what are some examples of content that was produced for pay at the Wikimedia Foundation? I can think of some archival material, such as the use of some material form the 11th edition of Britannica and images now in Commons. ]] _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
