Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Best practice guidelines for Public Relations professionals

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If the goal was to find "definitive community agreement" for a revised policy in regards to paid editing, the level of participation fell quite short here. Because this continues to be a very contentious topic, I have to call this no consensus with no prejudice against the proposal itself. I'd suggest trying to get something like this listed at WP:CENT or perhaps getting it started at the Village Pump or even Jimbo's talk page so folks are better aware of it. I, JethroBT drop me a line 19:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Do we approve the WMUK/CIPR guidelines to Wikipedia paid editing for Public Relations professionals? WMUK link

In 2012, Wikimedia UK in partnership with the Chartered Institute of Public Relations,[1] created best practice guidelines intended for PR companies to use as a guideline for paid editing on the English Wikipedia. The document has been draft on the Wikimedia UK website for 18 months, and has yet to have a demonstrable consensus with Wikimedia UK members or with the English Wikipedia editing community.

CIPR and PR companies have been referencing this document as standard guidelines for paid editing, and this has been presented by CIPR as an agreement with the community in the international press, examples can be found at Wikipedia and PR resources. For this reason, I would like to bring these guidelines for a definitive community agreement, or rejection, on the English Wikipedia. When agreed, I propose this document becomes maintained on this project rather than on the UK chapter wiki. --Fæ (talk) 11:27, 24 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

  • Oppose: I support Wikipedia's effort to reach out to PR agencies and educate them. While there are some good informational points on the source documents, this appears to be another effort to ban paid editing. Chris Troutman (talk) 06:00, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, these guidelines cite many industry and global ethics guidelines, and are a good guide to what a commercially paid editor on Wikipedia should do. This does not ban commercial editing in the sense that it makes commercially paid editors unwelcome altogether, but does establish a best practice for them, that of strictly sticking to the talk page except for a few obvious and uncontroversial cases. We should welcome commercial editors' input, but only with full COI disclosure and with vetting by neutral editors. The "Keep to the talk page, disclose, and request edits from others" principle does this quite well. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:55, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - this is the best proposal I've seen recently. Bearian (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

See also[edit]

Plain and simple COI guide[edit]

See Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide.Leutha (talk) 13:53, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No paid advocacy[edit]

See Wikipedia:No paid advocacy Leutha (talk) 13:58, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Best_practice_guidelines_for_Public_Relations_professionals&oldid=1141882380"