::True, the flood and scope of things is so large, I'm not sure any Wikiproject could make a dent in the waves. I do a search every now and then for "industry-leading" and do a few AfDs and article-chops as a result. I think throughout Wikipedia there are a lot of untapped opportunities to use analytics; one of them being to automatically detect obvious spam and censorship. Also, it is the Federal Trade Commission's responsibility - not Wikipedia's alone - to deter astroturfing. I have had a lot of luck using the FTC's legal mandates for marketing professionals online as an argument for ethical participation. 
  	  
 ::I will say that most PR people don't want to be here. We say that "COI editing is discouraged" but they are required to do their jobs and answer to their paymasters (boss or client) as to why they don't have an article or why it is so poor. PR people can't justify spending even a few days on Wikipedia. It is too small a part of their job (corporate side) or does not have enough billable hours (agency side) to invest in. So the idea of donating their time may be unrealistic. This is a big problem, because PR people don't actually want to learn to do it well, they just want it to be over with. 
  	  
 ::Anyways, as you say, you haven't been able to talk to a "paid editor," because most of us don't engage with the community in a meaningful way. So I guess that makes me a sort of exotic creature of sort in a unique position to provide perspective from our side of the fence, much like PRs and journalists actively network and discuss what they need from each other, etc..