Comments on: Microsoft Busted For Paid Wikipedia ‘Spamming’

By: CarstenCumbrowski

CarstenCumbrowski — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 12:16:27 +0000

Editing your own article at wikipedia? Bad idea. But it makes sense to some degree. The “neutral point of view” (WP:NPOV) is the recommended style to be used for an article. Now how neutral or unbiased are you about yourself? …. see!

By: Bashar

Bashar — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 05:30:45 +0000

Wikipedia is open for editing by the public. The matter is, the general public opinion does not match Microsoft opinion, and they want someone expert in this field to write good deal about them. So they are buying him to change his opinion, not because he is convinced and wants to defend their opinion.

If all companies do this, can you imagine what harm it will bring to the Wikipedia?

By: Lea de Groot

Lea de Groot — Fri, 26 Jan 2007 01:15:06 +0000

I stil don’t get this – if a microsoft employee had done the changes then they would have been paid for their time.
So, if they ask someone else to make the changes then they are happy to compensat for their time.
The changes having been made, they are just as open to changes by other editors as any other change.
Now if they had tried to pay someone inside Wikipedia to make a change that would not then be editable, then that would be wrong – but they didn’t.
I don’t see the problem in paying someone to do some work for you, when you will profit from the results.

~ can’t believe I am defending M$!!

By: Bashar

Bashar — Thu, 25 Jan 2007 19:38:06 +0000

Ouch… If this is true I wouldn’t dare to show to work for a week if I was in there shoes!