 | Please refer to the Wikipedia policy on paid contributions at Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure (WP:PAID). |
 | This is a failed proposal. Consensus for its implementation was not established within a reasonable period of time. If you want to revive discussion, please use the talk page or initiate a thread at the village pump. |
| Paid Editing Proposals |
| In November 2013, there were three main discussions and votes on paid editing: |
| No paid advocacy (talk) (closed: opposed) |
| Paid editing policy proposal (talk) (closed: opposed) |
| Conflict of interest limit (talk) (closed: opposed) |
Summary: If you are being compensated for contributing to a Wikipedia article, you must disclose this fact before editing. If your edits cause a dispute, you may be asked to stop editing the article. Advocacy is forbidden.
Paid editing is the practice of accepting money to edit Wikipedia. Editors who intend to participate in paid editing are required to edit transparently and neutrally, and are prohibited from introducing bias into Wikipedia's coverage or violating our core content policies – just like any other editors. To ensure the neutrality of paid editors, they must disclose that they are being compensated for their contributions.
Paid advocacy is being paid to promote or disparage something or someone on Wikipedia, and is a subset of paid editing. All advocacy, paid or unpaid, is prohibited on Wikipedia.
Accepting money or rewards for editing Wikipedia is not inherently problematic. For example, it would be acceptable if a university asked one of its professors to write up its warts-and-all history for a Wikipedia article. The Wikipedia reward board – a place where editors can post incentives, financial or otherwise – is another benign example. In these examples, the paid editing is transparent and usually intended to improve the quality of articles, not to slant the articles toward a particular point of view.