This document discusses guidelines for pharmaceutical companies and their employees editing Wikipedia articles. It advises that individuals rather than companies should make edits, using their own user names. Editors must declare any conflicts of interest relating to their employer. They should not directly edit articles about their own organizations but rather work with the Wikipedia community by suggesting edits on talk pages and requesting that others make changes. The guidelines emphasize transparency, neutrality, and working collaboratively with other editors.
2. Introduction
• The largest Encyclopedia in the world
• Anyone who can access the site can edit it
• From „Wiki‟meaning quick in Hawaiian and “Pedia‟from Encyclopedia
3. Definition
‘Wikipedia is a collaboratively
edited, multilingual, free
Internet encyclopedia that
is supported by the non-profit
Wikimedia Foundation’
5. Is it accurate?
‘A 2005 investigation in Nature showed that the 42 science articles they
compared came close to the level of accuracy of Encyclopædia Britannica’
7. The 5 Pillars of Wikipedia
The fundamental principles by which Wikipedia operates can be
summarized in five "pillars”:
Wikipedia is an
encyclopedia
Wikipedia is written
from a neutral point
of view
Wikipedia is free
content that anyone
can edit, use, modify,
and distribute
Editors should treat
each other with
respect and civility
Wikipedia does not
have firm rules
1 2 3
4 5
8. 1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia
• Wikipedia is not a soapbox, an advertising platform, a vanity press,
an experiment in anarchy or democracy, an indiscriminate collection
of information, or a web directory. It is not a dictionary, a newspaper,
or a collection of source documents
Do not write for specific audiences, e.g.
patients or doctors
9. 2. Wikipedia is written from a neutral
point of view
• All articles must strive for verifiable accuracy, citing
reliable, authoritative sources, especially when the topic is
controversial
or is on living persons. Editors' personal
experiences, interpretations, or opinions do not belong.
Write so it's impossible to tell that someone
who works for the company wrote it
10. 3. Wikipedia is free content that anyone can
edit, use, modify, and distribute
• Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor
owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly
edited and redistributed. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize
from sources.
Be careful what you share
11. 4. Editors should treat each other with
respect and civility
• Respect your fellow Wikipedians, even when you disagree.
Don't engage in personal attacks. Seek consensus, avoid edit
wars, and never disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.
• Act in good faith, and assume good faith on the part of others.
Be open and welcoming to newcomers. If a conflict arises, discuss it
calmly on the nearest talk pages and follow dispute resolution
Stay calm!
12. 5. Wikipedia does not have firm rules
• Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, Their principles and spirit
matter more than their literal wording, and sometimes improving
Wikipedia requires making an exception.
• Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. Every past version of a
page is saved, so any mistakes can be easily corrected.
Act in the spirit of Wikipedia
14. Individuals not companies
• Individual user names only
• Does not have to be your real name
• May mention your company if not promotional e.g. ‘John at Pfizer’
• User page should be clear e.g. ‘I am John, I work for Pfizer’
• Multiple people are not allowed to use this account
• Breaching this may result in your account being blocked
15. Declare your conflict of Interest
If you work directly or indirectly for a Pharma company you have a
conflict when making Pharma related edits
• Declare your conflict of interest (COI)
• On your user page
• On article talk pages related to your COI
• On other users and project talk pages when you have a COI
• As a link to your signature
• Consider declaring on the COI noticeboard
• This will help gain the community‟s trust and their help
• It will help avoid embarrassing revelations of misconduct
16. Do not edit articles about yourself, your
family or friends, your organisation, your
clients, or your competitors
Let others make the changes!
17. Work with the community
The
Village
Pump
Articles
for
creation
Peer
Review
Article
Talk Pages
User
Talk Pages
Project
Talk Pages
28. User contributions
The edits here were almost all
made via the talk pages (apart
from some minor ones)
Changes to corporate pages are
likely to be less contentious than
brand changes
30. Conclusions
• Do not edit pages directly where you have a conflict of interest
• Create content that is neutral and suitable for a broad audience
• Work with the community
• Ask questions on the relevant talk pages
• Suggest edits and content
• Always consider foremost what will increase the value of Wikipedia
• Be bold but not reckless
OverviewOver 70 million users, of which about 80% are womenBy pinning and re-pinning images and videos, users can create inspiration boards and track visual changes over timePins are categorised into broad topics such as, architecture or health and fitnessSearch functionality to find pins/boards/people about specific topicsSecret dashboards (triggers)Top tips: Organise and categorise to perfectionBe original but specific in your board names Get involved – it is so easy to spend hours pinning and re-pinning – let yourself, with such a simple UX get to grips with it by doing
OverviewOver 70 million users, of which about 80% are womenBy pinning and re-pinning images and videos, users can create inspiration boards and track visual changes over timePins are categorised into broad topics such as, architecture or health and fitnessSearch functionality to find pins/boards/people about specific topicsSecret dashboards (triggers)Top tips: Organise and categorise to perfectionBe original but specific in your board names Get involved – it is so easy to spend hours pinning and re-pinning – let yourself, with such a simple UX get to grips with it by doing
I agree that pharma have the staff and money to spend promoting their goods, but there are also many people happy to pump an anti-point of view with original research and links to poor sites. Having looked through some of the medication articles recently I find lists of horrific side effects without verification, I find links to sites of anecdotal evidence. I'm not worried about a lack of balance, but I am concerned that there's a lack of wiki quality in some articles, and it's difficult to tackle. People seem to want to push "The Truth THEY Don't Want You To Know!!!1!" and there's no reliable source for that POV. Dan Beale 21:00, 18 April 2007 (UTC)