Changes

MyWikiBiz, Author Your Legacy — Friday September 24, 2021
Jump to navigationJump to search
→‎Paid editing: spacing on MyWikiBiz article, since I scanned this from Jonathan Zittrain's book.
Line 35: Line 35:  
== History of the site ==
 
== History of the site ==
 
=== Paid editing ===
 
=== Paid editing ===
[[Directory:Gregory J. Kohs|Gregory Kohs]] and his sister started the MyWikiBiz venture in [[Directory:Pennsylvania|Pennsylvania]] in [[July]] [[2006]], initially as a paid editing service, writing encyclopedic content for inclusion in Wikipedia and other community-edited sites. Tiers of service were priced at $49, $79, and $99 per article. Kohs stated his intention to make [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view neutral], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources sourced] content, and expected the general public to continue altering and improving the articles he created. Although no official Wikipedia policy prohibited paid-for contributions, and although Wikipedia endorsed cash-for-editing via its[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reward_board#Money Reward Board], Chairman Emeritus of the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] [[Directory:Jimmy Wales|Jimmy Wales]] first called the commercialized editing "antithetical" to Wikipedia's mission.   
+
[[Directory:Gregory J. Kohs|Gregory Kohs]] and his sister started the MyWikiBiz venture in [[Directory:Pennsylvania|Pennsylvania]] in [[July]] [[2006]], initially as a paid editing service, writing encyclopedic content for inclusion in Wikipedia and other community-edited sites. Tiers of service were priced at $49, $79, and $99 per article. Kohs stated his intention to make [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view neutral], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Citing_sources sourced] content, and expected the general public to continue altering and improving the articles he created. Although no official Wikipedia policy prohibited paid-for contributions, and although Wikipedia endorsed cash-for-editing via its [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reward_board#Money Reward Board], Chairman Emeritus of the [[Directory:Wikimedia Foundation|Wikimedia Foundation]] [[Directory:Jimmy Wales|Jimmy Wales]] first called the commercialized editing "antithetical" to Wikipedia's mission.   
    
However, in [[August]] 2006, Wales issued a "mutually beneficial" compromise [http://www.nabble.com/MyWikiBiz-tf2080660.html] where he encouraged MyWikiBiz to author and post content on a GFDL-compliant section of MyWikiBiz.com, which could then be scraped by non-paid, independent editors into Wikipedia and other GFDL sites. Over the course of late 2006, [[finance|financial]] [[conflict of interest|conflicts of interest]] became regulated under Wikipedia's new conflict of interest policy.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_of_interest]  In [[October]] 2006, despite there being little reason to do so, Wales aggressively reversed his earlier compromise with MyWikiBiz, banning the account from Wikipedia and cautioning any business from using its services.  Days later, Wales issued MyWikiBiz a trademark violation complaint, but the legal threat was ignored, as it had no basis in law.
 
However, in [[August]] 2006, Wales issued a "mutually beneficial" compromise [http://www.nabble.com/MyWikiBiz-tf2080660.html] where he encouraged MyWikiBiz to author and post content on a GFDL-compliant section of MyWikiBiz.com, which could then be scraped by non-paid, independent editors into Wikipedia and other GFDL sites. Over the course of late 2006, [[finance|financial]] [[conflict of interest|conflicts of interest]] became regulated under Wikipedia's new conflict of interest policy.[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflicts_of_interest]  In [[October]] 2006, despite there being little reason to do so, Wales aggressively reversed his earlier compromise with MyWikiBiz, banning the account from Wikipedia and cautioning any business from using its services.  Days later, Wales issued MyWikiBiz a trademark violation complaint, but the legal threat was ignored, as it had no basis in law.

Navigation menu