![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I work for WhiteHatWiki.com, which was hired by the subject of the article. I have rewritten a previous page that was deleted because the user was suspected to have been banned from Wikipedia as sock. This is my only account and I have never had another. The ethos of WhiteHatWiki is strictly abiding by Wikipedia policies (“white hat”), especially disclosure of conflict of interest. Aside from disclosure, I have tried to abide by NPOV, RS, Verify and other policies. As this page is about a product, whose notability is based on product reviews, I tried to be very sensitive to WP: PROMO. W12SW77 ( talk) 20:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Moving these notes from the Draft per note from @ W12SW77 on my Talk as, to their point, the sock questions have been resolved sufficiently and these comments are not helpful to a future AfC reviewer but might be helpful for overall context in terms of the draft's history W12, let me know if this works for you? Star Mississippi 00:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
--
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
I’d like to suggest edits to this article to address complaints of possible promotional language flagged on the top of the page, as well as one structural issue. I work for WhiteHatWiki, which was hired by the subject of this article.
First request
Please move the current fourth sentence of the History section to become the new first sentence of the History section.
Along with his son, Lex, [1] Osler founded QOR360 in 2016. [2]
Reason for the change:
Sets the stage for a more standard company History section, placing the founding date above the origin story.
Second request
Please replace what should now be the fourth sentence in the History section.
From:
Osler said he conceived his own design after he was unable to find an affordable ergonomic chair that alleviated his back pain. [3]
To:
Osler said he conceived his own design after he was unable to find an affordable ergonomic chair. [3]
Reason:
As written, the sentence could be interpreted as claiming that Osler’s chair will alleviate back pain. This would be a biomedical claim based on Osler’s experience, not peer-reviewed research.
Third request
Please replace the first sentence in the Product section.
From:
The chairs are designed around a feature Osler patented as RedRocker technology; [4] a dome-shaped rubber piece beneath the seat that allows it to wobble and pivot. [1]
To:
The chairs are designed around a dome-shaped rubber piece beneath the seat that allows it to wobble and pivot. [1]
Reason:
The suggested replacement removes branding language that is unnecessary to convey the information.
Fourth request
Please replace the second paragraph of the Product section.
From:
In 2022 QOR360 designed a chair called the ButtOn, that is intended for use in classrooms and be constructed using free, downloadable plans. [5]
To:
In 2022 QOR360 designed a chair for use in classrooms that can be constructed using free, downloadable plans. [5]
Reason:
The suggested replacement removes branding language that is unnecessary to convey the information.
Fifth request
Please remove the flag from the top of the page.
Reason:
The proposed edits have removed possibly promotional content, the reason for the flag.
Thanks for your time and assistance. W12SW77 ( talk) 16:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC) W12SW77 ( talk) 16:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
References
This is a new article (albeit a bit long in the tooth), so I looked at it as part of NPP. Tricky because of the prior deletion & COI. Also tricky because if it had not been designed by a retired trauma surgeon I doubt it would have received coverage. (Consider if it had been designed by an art student or an accountant.)
Proofs of notability might be massive sales, strong reviews in independent articles, industry awards or similar. All I could find was a scathing review in wired magazine. Ldm1954 ( talk) 05:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
A request has been made via WP:3O for a third editor to weigh in on a discussion of Notability. W12SW77 ( talk) 13:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The user below has a request that an edit be made to
QOR360. That user has an
actual or apparent
conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is high. Please be very patient. There are currently 184 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. |
I’d like to request that the line in the maintenance template saying the page reads like advertising be removed. I have a conflict of interest as a consultant for WhiteHatWiki, hired by the subject of this article. (I am taking over from User:W12SW77 from WhiteHatWiki).
In November 2023, a maintenance template was added to the page stating that the article contains content that is written like an advertisement.
Since then, no editor has started a Talk page discussion to explain the problem. The tag can be removed by any editor for that reason alone under WP:WTRMT. This policy says that when it comes to neutrality-related templates such as “tlx|POV” (associated with the neutral point of view policy) it is “strongly recommended that the tagging editor initiate a discussion (generally on the article's talk page) to support the placement of the tag. If the tagging editor failed to do so, or the discussion is dormant, and there is no other support for the template, it can be removed.”
Any article which describes a company’s products can be claimed by some to have an advertising tone since even the most neutral description of products or services might be argued to be of benefit to the company. But this argument, absent specific claims of NPOV violations, is contrary to Wikipedia policy. Pages about companies with products, or even products themselves, are a well established part of WP: NCORP, which even allows independent product reviews to help qualify a page. WP:PRODUCTREV
The language on the QOR360 page is neutral and devoid of puffery, so far as I can tell and no one has brought up any contrary specifics.
It’s now been since February 2024 [1] that I suggested minor changes to the page that might improve NPOV, in order to remove this flag. I was just trying to guess at what the flagging editor might have thought since no specifics were offered. The requests were accepted but the flag removal was declined without any detail except to repeat the exact “advertising” language of the template.
Since then, no one has started a decision to justify the flag (nor was any discussion started by the editor placing the flag at any time since November 2023.) I think that’s because there’s nothing specific to point to unless one were to argue, contrary to Wikipedia policy, that the existence of a page about any product in and of itself is advertising
At this point, it seems the flag might be being used punitively, contrary to WP:TC “Cleanup tags are meant to be temporary notices that lead to an effort to fix the problem, not a permanent badge of shame”.
There’s been ample opportunity to start a discussion with some specifics. I’ve offered multiple times to address anything and even guessed at tweaks I thought might help. The flag serves no purpose if the Talk page is silent on what actually might improve the page. Brucemyboy1212 ( talk) 17:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
FT
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I work for WhiteHatWiki.com, which was hired by the subject of the article. I have rewritten a previous page that was deleted because the user was suspected to have been banned from Wikipedia as sock. This is my only account and I have never had another. The ethos of WhiteHatWiki is strictly abiding by Wikipedia policies (“white hat”), especially disclosure of conflict of interest. Aside from disclosure, I have tried to abide by NPOV, RS, Verify and other policies. As this page is about a product, whose notability is based on product reviews, I tried to be very sensitive to WP: PROMO. W12SW77 ( talk) 20:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)
Moving these notes from the Draft per note from @ W12SW77 on my Talk as, to their point, the sock questions have been resolved sufficiently and these comments are not helpful to a future AfC reviewer but might be helpful for overall context in terms of the draft's history W12, let me know if this works for you? Star Mississippi 00:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
--
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. |
I’d like to suggest edits to this article to address complaints of possible promotional language flagged on the top of the page, as well as one structural issue. I work for WhiteHatWiki, which was hired by the subject of this article.
First request
Please move the current fourth sentence of the History section to become the new first sentence of the History section.
Along with his son, Lex, [1] Osler founded QOR360 in 2016. [2]
Reason for the change:
Sets the stage for a more standard company History section, placing the founding date above the origin story.
Second request
Please replace what should now be the fourth sentence in the History section.
From:
Osler said he conceived his own design after he was unable to find an affordable ergonomic chair that alleviated his back pain. [3]
To:
Osler said he conceived his own design after he was unable to find an affordable ergonomic chair. [3]
Reason:
As written, the sentence could be interpreted as claiming that Osler’s chair will alleviate back pain. This would be a biomedical claim based on Osler’s experience, not peer-reviewed research.
Third request
Please replace the first sentence in the Product section.
From:
The chairs are designed around a feature Osler patented as RedRocker technology; [4] a dome-shaped rubber piece beneath the seat that allows it to wobble and pivot. [1]
To:
The chairs are designed around a dome-shaped rubber piece beneath the seat that allows it to wobble and pivot. [1]
Reason:
The suggested replacement removes branding language that is unnecessary to convey the information.
Fourth request
Please replace the second paragraph of the Product section.
From:
In 2022 QOR360 designed a chair called the ButtOn, that is intended for use in classrooms and be constructed using free, downloadable plans. [5]
To:
In 2022 QOR360 designed a chair for use in classrooms that can be constructed using free, downloadable plans. [5]
Reason:
The suggested replacement removes branding language that is unnecessary to convey the information.
Fifth request
Please remove the flag from the top of the page.
Reason:
The proposed edits have removed possibly promotional content, the reason for the flag.
Thanks for your time and assistance. W12SW77 ( talk) 16:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC) W12SW77 ( talk) 16:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
References
This is a new article (albeit a bit long in the tooth), so I looked at it as part of NPP. Tricky because of the prior deletion & COI. Also tricky because if it had not been designed by a retired trauma surgeon I doubt it would have received coverage. (Consider if it had been designed by an art student or an accountant.)
Proofs of notability might be massive sales, strong reviews in independent articles, industry awards or similar. All I could find was a scathing review in wired magazine. Ldm1954 ( talk) 05:29, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
A request has been made via WP:3O for a third editor to weigh in on a discussion of Notability. W12SW77 ( talk) 13:37, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
![]() | The user below has a request that an edit be made to
QOR360. That user has an
actual or apparent
conflict of interest. The requested edits backlog is high. Please be very patient. There are currently 184 requests waiting for review. Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Wikipedia guidelines and policies. |
I’d like to request that the line in the maintenance template saying the page reads like advertising be removed. I have a conflict of interest as a consultant for WhiteHatWiki, hired by the subject of this article. (I am taking over from User:W12SW77 from WhiteHatWiki).
In November 2023, a maintenance template was added to the page stating that the article contains content that is written like an advertisement.
Since then, no editor has started a Talk page discussion to explain the problem. The tag can be removed by any editor for that reason alone under WP:WTRMT. This policy says that when it comes to neutrality-related templates such as “tlx|POV” (associated with the neutral point of view policy) it is “strongly recommended that the tagging editor initiate a discussion (generally on the article's talk page) to support the placement of the tag. If the tagging editor failed to do so, or the discussion is dormant, and there is no other support for the template, it can be removed.”
Any article which describes a company’s products can be claimed by some to have an advertising tone since even the most neutral description of products or services might be argued to be of benefit to the company. But this argument, absent specific claims of NPOV violations, is contrary to Wikipedia policy. Pages about companies with products, or even products themselves, are a well established part of WP: NCORP, which even allows independent product reviews to help qualify a page. WP:PRODUCTREV
The language on the QOR360 page is neutral and devoid of puffery, so far as I can tell and no one has brought up any contrary specifics.
It’s now been since February 2024 [1] that I suggested minor changes to the page that might improve NPOV, in order to remove this flag. I was just trying to guess at what the flagging editor might have thought since no specifics were offered. The requests were accepted but the flag removal was declined without any detail except to repeat the exact “advertising” language of the template.
Since then, no one has started a decision to justify the flag (nor was any discussion started by the editor placing the flag at any time since November 2023.) I think that’s because there’s nothing specific to point to unless one were to argue, contrary to Wikipedia policy, that the existence of a page about any product in and of itself is advertising
At this point, it seems the flag might be being used punitively, contrary to WP:TC “Cleanup tags are meant to be temporary notices that lead to an effort to fix the problem, not a permanent badge of shame”.
There’s been ample opportunity to start a discussion with some specifics. I’ve offered multiple times to address anything and even guessed at tweaks I thought might help. The flag serves no purpose if the Talk page is silent on what actually might improve the page. Brucemyboy1212 ( talk) 17:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
FT
was invoked but never defined (see the
help page).