Wikipedia forbids its users to be paid or compensated in any way to edit Wikipedia. The argument is that a paid contributor will not be neutral with the pages or topics he or she is paid to modify. In other words, paid contributors carry a conflict of interest and are unable to adopt a neutral point of view (NPOV).

Wikipedia has rules to which users must abide. When a conflict emerges, you realize that a lot of those rules contradict each other or leave too much room for personal interpretation. Usually the most bullish group wins the face-off, regardless of the quality of the others’ plaidoyer. In the justice system, people hire lawyers to defend them. Hiring an expert, in any sector, is a smart move. Wikipedia is one of the rare places where hiring an expert is forbidden, and only amateurship prevails.

So the question stands: is a paid editor a bad Wikipedia contributor?

1. Here at Wiki Editor, out of 100 edits made on Wikipedia, only 5 are paid edits. The other 95 are solid contributions made elsewhere to dilute paid edits in hundreds of other contributions. The 95 other edits are not blank shots: to give authority to an account and earn some editorial freedom, an account must consistently make constructive edits. Over the past 5 years for example, Wiki Editor made tens of thousands of “non-client” edits on Wikipedia, in several languages. Other paid contributors operate in the same fashion, feeding Wikipedia with constructive edits to earn editorial freedom. The good professional Wikipedia editor is the constructive kind.
2. Paid contributors do not want to make waves, because it gets so much harder when other users get on your back and hold a grudge against you. So the true paid editor is also the quiet kind who doesn’t get into endless debates or conflicts.
3. A paid editor must avoid at all cost to be identified as one. Therefore, when drafting a new page for a client, the paid editor will avoid as much as possible to include anything that might feel too promotional, too hagiographic, too detailed, to avoid suspicions from the community. The professional Wikipedia editor is even more neutrality-driven than the rest of the community because any conflict with the community will cost him time and profitability.
4. The professional Wikipedia editor never edits pages related to him/her or his/her direct interests, because it would leave a trail that could lead back to him/her. Unlike an amateur editor who is more likely to follow his/her own interests, the professional Wikipedia writer fosters a solid neutral policy of keeping away from personal interests and beliefs. As a reminder, Wikipedia invites you to edit topics not too close to you because it may get you personally involved, but very few volunteer editors actually follow this recommendation.
5. If someone chose to dedicate a professional career to Wikipedia, you can trust this person has a passion for the online encyclopedia that goes beyond the financial reward. Editing Wikipedia professionally is not a top paid job, you stick to it because you love what you do.

The professional Wikipedia editor – unlike many volunteer editors – is a strict follower of rules, a true Wikipedia monk. The incentive of fostering a business increases self-control and adhesion with the platform, not the other way around.