No. You underestimate their subtlety and professionalism.. See Durova, at http://searchengineland.com/seo-tips-tactics-from-a-wikipedia-insider-11715 . I am aware of editing by paid editing that is neither aggressive nor inappropriate. Really good PR people can learn to be careful not to express a POV when they know they are not supposed to.
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 6:20 PM, Fred Bauder <fredb...@fairpoint.net> wrote: >> Obviously, the ones who do better at it are the ones we cannot detect. > > It is not so much that they cannot be detected, after all their editing > has purpose and they are usually both aggressive and persistent. However, > adequate demonstration of such patterns of activity to other > administrators, or ultimately, to a committee is not trivial. > > The essential clue is that they have a strong point of view about > something that no ordinary person would be exercised about, some company > or product with public relations deficits. > > Ultimately, pursuit of any but the most clumsy is hard thankless work. > Beating on the clumsy, is, of course, a necessary task if only to correct > bad editing. > > Fred > > > > > _______________________________________________ > foundation-l mailing list > foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l > -- David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l