While paid editing is not against policy, editors actually violate policy by disrupting Wikipedia to prove their point that paid editing should not be allowed.
As a paid Wikipedia editor, I can tell you that there are thousands of people out there looking to pay someone to create a Wikipedia page. To clarify, I am a paid editor, but not paid by Wikipedia to edit. In fact, paid editing on Wikipedia is and has always been frowned upon by the Wikipedia community.
Although there is no policy specifically against paid editing, editors and administrators on the World’s 7th most visited website find any reason to delete or vandalize paid edits. There are many reasons why they hate paid editing which I will not get into here, but regardless of their reasons it becomes a full time job to protect articles that I have created as an expert Wikipedia editor.
Editors and administrators actually stalk my work, including profiles on freelance writing sites, and often send me fake emails in an attempt to get me to disclose my previous work.
In the course of my work as an expert Wikipedia editor, people often ask me for samples of my previous work. This is a common question for any type of service and I am never offended when people ask. In fact, I do the same when trying to decide to use a service. If you are building a house, wouldn’t you like to see samples of your general contractor’s work prior to letting him swing a hammer on your project? Of course you would.
So, while I am not offended when people ask, I have to simply tell them that I cannot accommodate their request to show samples of previous work.
What led to this stance on disclosure?
Back in 2012, I provided samples of my work to a potential client who contacted me by email. I laid out my proposal in normal fashion, explaining how the creation process works as well as payment terms. The final part of the proposal contained several links to Wikipedia articles that I had previously written.
Within a few days, those articles were vandalized or deleted for various reasons. While none of them were legitimate reasons, it showed how editors on Wikipedia are willing to twist policy in their favor and damage the work of paid editors. Instead of contributing to the Wikipedia community, they actually go off-site and attempt to “investigate” paid editors.
So, while paid editing is not against policy, editors actually violate policy by disrupting Wikipedia to prove their point that paid editing should not be allowed.
If you are looking to pay someone to create a Wikipedia page, asking for samples of previous work is fine, but do not be upset if me or anyone you request a bid from fails to provide you with such. I have lost many potential clients for failing to disclose previous work. However, I have retained hundreds of valuable clients by not exposing the work I have done for them and jeopardizing the status of their articles.
Since this article was written in 2012, the Wikimedia Foundation in their infinite wisdom (please excuse the sarcasm) implemented new terms and conditions that requires paid editors to disclose their work on Wikipedia. Based on my experience with what happens when people disclose their work (according to the article above), I will continue to protect my clients (both current and future clients) by NOT disclosing any of my paid work.
“When the Wikimedia Foundation and the hierarchy of Wikipedia editors (checkusers, administrators, etc.) that they entrust the website too (including Jimmy Wales) adhere to the terms and conditions of the Foundation, I will do the same.”
Want to know more about how I can help you with your Wikipedia presence? Send me an email and let’s chat.