I'll layout my mindset when writing Dennis Lo.  The employer contacted me because he had previously worked with me on another project unrelated to this.  He asked if I could write up an article.  I told him I needed 3 days to decide if I would take the job to determine if an article could even be written that was met guidelines.  I determined that there was, accepted the job, and wrote it.  Now, could the article have been written by anyone without getting paid?  Yes.  In fact, red links for Dennis Lo already existed in two other articles.  I gathered as many sources as I could and wrote what they said.  Did that prohibit me from being critical?  As seen in the Tops In Blue article, I can be critical of topics I have a COI in (I have a friend who was in TiB at the time I rewrote that article).  So what does payment get the employer?  Well, he doesn't have to wait for some random disinterested party to get around to writing it.  They arn't buying my integrity, it's not for sale.  They arn't buying my bit, that's not mine in the first place.  As far as I am concerned, me getting paid gets me to write in topic areas I normally wouldn't.  That's the only 'effect' it has on me.  I'm much more interested in this project than picking up some crappy freelance job that's going to lead to me being asked to leave.  My guess is that most established editors feel the same way.  I can see where paid editing firms who hire folks who have never touched Wikipedia is a bad thing, but for those of us who have put our hearts into this project, you're making a very offensive claim that we arn't fully committed to the success of this thing.v/r - P