On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 18:18, Yaroslav M. Blanter <pute...@mccme.ru> wrote: > What if someone registers an account 'Miscrosoft" and starts vandal > editing? The media reports like 'Miscosoft blocked for vandalism in > Wikipedia'" would be hardly better than 'Microsoft blocked on sight'. > > Concerning the joint accounts I thought the main problem is that someone > should be held responsible for the edits. I mean if there are some illegal > edits done from this account and then someone claims it is not him, it is > another user who uses the same account? On ru.wp we ban the joint accounts > on sight, even though the company name policy has not been really > enforced.
I support Liam's idea and think we might want to look at a two-tier policy: 1- have "verified" accounts, which are used by some companies/organisation to do "encyclopedic work" 2- disallow using a company's name in one's user name if they have not asked for a verification - and provided the right credentials This said, I am completely with Lodewijk on the fact that I find incredible that we push companies to actually make what is nothing else than sock puppets accounts, because we don't allow to have a company's name in the user name. I am sure this has been debated at length, but I fail to see how this can be better than being able to identify staff from a company contributing to an article. Delphine -- ~notafish NB. This gmail address is used for mailing lists. Personal emails will get lost. Intercultural musings: Ceci n'est pas une endive - http://blog.notanendive.org _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list foundation-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
