Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sections older than 14 days
archived by
Lowercase sigmabot III.
| ||||
You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{
subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
| ||||
| ||||
Additional notes:
| ||||
| ||||
To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:
|
Search the COI noticeboard archives |
Help answer requested edits |
Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests is where COI editors have placed the {{
edit COI}} template:
|
User Autodesplanifica contributions is a single purpose account which created a promotional account for a borderline notable academic. Back in April, I deleted the puff and queried whether there was a COI, which seems blatant to me. The user replied that there was not and accused me of vandalism (also by email). Over the weekend they returned to add more uncited promotional material and added a photo. I'd be grateful if somebody could take a look, thanks. Mujinga ( talk) 17:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Username walks the line of WP:UAA. Editor appears to be slowly turning the article into an advert for the college. Warned about COI, continued editing with no communication. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 ( talk) 16:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
User has continued disruptive editing on an article that they have a conflict of interest on, despite being warned multiple times. Jdcomix ( talk) 16:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Vitaliy Khomutynnik's article has attracted COI/UPEs in the past to white wash his biography and they were blocked for violations. Now, a user with just 298 edits (User:Jenes) has whitewashed the article again from this to this. One of the sock even disclosed the payment status. Can we investigate/revert this obvious sock? More eyes the better. 86.97.145.183 ( talk) 21:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
This is a blatent COI article, and this user has already been banned from editing an article created on him. OnlyNano talk 21:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
One of the creators of this new BLP (which I tagged while patrolling) has helpfully declared that they are a paid editor. Am I right in assuming that such an article should be moved to WP:AFC? thanks. Aszx5000 ( talk) 08:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
"This is where Maximatic Media's expertise comes into play, crafting pages that not only go live but remain intact against the scrutiny of Wikipedia's dedicated community of editors and administrators."
For the interested. Sadly, the writer never asked about if they follow WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 12:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their ownand also that
You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. That this would be a sort of paid news piece doesn't seem to be all that surprising, and editorial standards regarding paid news tend to be quite low; this piece is somewhat indistinguishable from an ad. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
See this super-gross Rolling Stone UK piece with a tiny disclaimer at the bottom "Stream Publishing not involved in this content" i.e. it's churnalism under their name. Of course, reputation management is Maximatic's business; their Wikipedia page creation service is listed under the wonderful sub-heading "Mastering Online Reputation Management". ☆ Bri ( talk) 17:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
https://maximaticmedia.com/twitter-username-claims/ "our Media Partner representative at Twitter and await their approval." Sorry, maybe a Media Partner representative at CNN or White House? This smells of scam. Only an idiot would risk employment at Twitter for this travesty. These aren't playing with you. Fired, and black listed till no-one will hire you again. Why, it's illegal actions. Fraud. Gamma1138 ( talk) 22:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
To quote edit summaries I am his assistant. I have updated more about him
and This is the real version for yousuf Bhailok. I am his election campaign manager
, both left while turning the article into a hagiography.
81.187.192.168 (
talk)
18:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
This user has been adding advertising (or at least very spammy Title Case Industry Jargon) to this article. No communication; reversal is met with instant reversion. Coming here to avoid 3RR issues. 81.187.192.168 ( talk) 20:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
User has edited an article that is apparently about themself despite a prior warning about a potential conflict of interest. Jdcomix ( talk) 15:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
I received a message on my talk page on Simple English Wikipedia which led to this discussion also on Simple English Wikipedia about user Nuel Jr. Copying information here for those interested and notified the person who pinged me to email evidence to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. CNMall41 ( talk) 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Without having seen any external evidence, I was considering blocking the account as a spam account. It has an extensive history of blatantly promotional editing, so much so that It's remarkable that he's got away with it for so long. JBW ( talk) 08:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Nine pages created by this editor have been deleted as promotional, by various administrators. Others probably should be deleted. JBW ( talk) 10:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
I have now checked the editor's page creations, and deleted two more of them as promotional. There is one more draft, which in my opinion is promotional-ish, but not enough to justify speedy deletion. JBW ( talk) 10:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
The latest undeclared paid editor on this article appears to have a single goal – removal of the UPE template at the top. It was removed without comment by them as their first ever edit, and removed again without comment as their second. They then made a series of very minor edits culminating with the removal of the template again. Once more (wrongly, I should've come here at this point, I put my hands up to it) it was removed this time saying that their small changes of capitalisation and word order meant that the UPE tag no longer applied, and again with the same reasoning.
I'm done here, as I should've been about 4 edits on the article ago, but would like others to take a look if possible. 81.187.192.168 ( talk) 11:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I am member of the Houma Language Project. We are a volunteer-led group of community members and linguists passionately focused on the reclamation and reconstruction of the Indigenous Houma language which was spoken in south Louisiana. In addition, we focus on cultural activities and archival documentation of the history of the Houma people and language.
As a result of our work and our expertise, we have noticed a myriad of pages on Wikipedia relating to Indigenous peoples of Louisiana, especially the Houma, that do not reflect existing published resources and lack substantive and in some cases accurate information. To remedy this, I volunteered to create a Wikipedia account on behalf of the project in early June. I made an error in that I created the account for use by the Houma Language Project team as a group, which I now understand to be in violation of Wikipedia's account policy. This has been rectified in that now I will be using the account as an individual, and the username has been changed to reflect this. However, I have received confusing and unsubstantiated mandates from several editors to not edit pages directly but instead to post edit requests (please see the User talk page). It has not explained why this would constitute a COI under Wikipedia guidelines but has instead placed the onus on me to seek an explanation for an arbitrarily dictated ruleset not clearly outlined (to the best of my knowledge) under Wikipedia's own terms.
Houma Language Project is neither a for-profit business, an incorporated non-profit, nor a tribe-affiliated entity at the time of writing. We are a group of individuals who have decided to dedicate our time to work together on the language. No one is an employee of the Houma Language Project, and as such, there is no possibility of payment in exchange for editing on Wikipedia. In addition, the COI guidelines were clearly written to avoid self-promotion and the entangelement of financial and business relationships with editing on Wikipedia. It has not been demonstrated to me how the editing of pages about the language and the Houma people, rather than, for example, a page about the Houma Language Project itself, while operating under Wikipedia's terms (such as using neutral language and acceptable references) coincides with any of these conflicts and constitutes promotion or advocacy of a particular point-of-view.
- User:Uma' Anũpa' ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I came across an interesting situation and wanted to make sure this doesn't represent an unusual variation on a paid COI. See the talk page for Nthurs for details. In short, they are a student at the school and are unpaid but acting under the direction of the dean's office. I asked them to follow the unpaid COI rules but may be mistaken. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
if they are directed or expected to edit Wikipedia as part of an internship, they must disclose. But this doesn't look like an internship in the traditional sense; these sorts of volunteer groups can almost function as pseudo-student clubs. There might be perks (such as bowling or escape room trips), but I'm a bit hesitant to label it as compensation for purposes of our policy—I'd struggle to see how it is different than a professor who is running a WikiEd class that happens to have dinner at his/her home one night or hosts a catered classroom edit-a-thon.
On the article Harlette, LuxuryUK72 has added content about the subject in a promotional tone, as well as on King's College London. Since the article subject operates a UK-based company called Harlette Luxury Lingerie & Swimwear, this username may be a reference to the company. With these two factors in mind, I gave LuxuryUK72 a COI warning on their talk page. Said user, however, has ignored this warning and continued to re-add the promotional content to these two articles, while adding snide comments on my talk page such as "clearly you have no understanding." Therefore, I'm opening up this case for investigation from more experienced users.-- Panian513 02:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
The user account was registered nearly two years ago, and the very first edit was to create a draft on Classic Tech, a business in Nepal. Since then, the user's almost entire edit history Special:Contributions/Sujandahal76 has to do with this draft, or discussions about it. (They have more recently diversified into a couple of other topics, so can't call them quite SPA.) Paid editing has been queried on the user's talk page, previously by another editor and most recently by me, but the user denies it. However, off-Wiki evidence (and I'll say no more, so as not to out anyone) shows that an individual, whose name matches the user name of this editor, works at Classic Tech. My contention is that either the edit history or the user name could just about be coincidences, but put together the more likely explanation is UPE. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Poppodoms seems to be a Wikipedia:Single-purpose account dedicated to creating articls related to Huawei such as BiSheng compiler, Cangjie (programming language), ArkTS, Ark Compiler, ArkUI, HarmonyOS NEXT, HarmonyOS kernel and more. I added a {{COI}} template on the Cangjie page which seems to have upset him as he wrote on my user page that I have 24 hours to remove it or else he will get other wiki mods to challenge it, one minute later an IP address removed the COI template and 3 minutes later the IP address wrote that my page that it has been "it has been resolved", 1 minute later Poppodoms responded thanking said IP address and wrote an unfounded statement about "discrimination and racism needs to stop". Frap ( talk) 21:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
This account, DollyQuire ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), is most likely a UPE. They have interest in Pakistani politics, created a biography of obscure "independent film director", and an obscure Saudi event sourced with press releases, InFlavour. Maybe we can draftify InFlavour? I also found this ad by InFlavour when I did a Google Search (accessible once you register on the site). 217.165.8.38 ( talk) 16:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
It appears that Jonmsweeney has been editing in violation of the clear conflict of interest for many years. If they are not Jon M. Sweeney then they should probably be blocked for using that person's name as their username. If they are Jon Sweeney or closely connected to him then have edited in violation of that conflict of interest many, many times despite being warned several times on their User Talk page. Examples of edits that appear to be problematic include:
These edits have been occurring since 2017. They did pause for about two years but they began again today. These edits are not acceptable and they must cease, one way or another. ElKevbo ( talk) 19:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sections older than 14 days
archived by
Lowercase sigmabot III.
| ||||
You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{
subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
| ||||
| ||||
Additional notes:
| ||||
| ||||
To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:
|
Search the COI noticeboard archives |
Help answer requested edits |
Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests is where COI editors have placed the {{
edit COI}} template:
|
User Autodesplanifica contributions is a single purpose account which created a promotional account for a borderline notable academic. Back in April, I deleted the puff and queried whether there was a COI, which seems blatant to me. The user replied that there was not and accused me of vandalism (also by email). Over the weekend they returned to add more uncited promotional material and added a photo. I'd be grateful if somebody could take a look, thanks. Mujinga ( talk) 17:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Username walks the line of WP:UAA. Editor appears to be slowly turning the article into an advert for the college. Warned about COI, continued editing with no communication. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 ( talk) 16:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
User has continued disruptive editing on an article that they have a conflict of interest on, despite being warned multiple times. Jdcomix ( talk) 16:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Vitaliy Khomutynnik's article has attracted COI/UPEs in the past to white wash his biography and they were blocked for violations. Now, a user with just 298 edits (User:Jenes) has whitewashed the article again from this to this. One of the sock even disclosed the payment status. Can we investigate/revert this obvious sock? More eyes the better. 86.97.145.183 ( talk) 21:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
This is a blatent COI article, and this user has already been banned from editing an article created on him. OnlyNano talk 21:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
One of the creators of this new BLP (which I tagged while patrolling) has helpfully declared that they are a paid editor. Am I right in assuming that such an article should be moved to WP:AFC? thanks. Aszx5000 ( talk) 08:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
"This is where Maximatic Media's expertise comes into play, crafting pages that not only go live but remain intact against the scrutiny of Wikipedia's dedicated community of editors and administrators."
For the interested. Sadly, the writer never asked about if they follow WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 12:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their ownand also that
You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. That this would be a sort of paid news piece doesn't seem to be all that surprising, and editorial standards regarding paid news tend to be quite low; this piece is somewhat indistinguishable from an ad. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
See this super-gross Rolling Stone UK piece with a tiny disclaimer at the bottom "Stream Publishing not involved in this content" i.e. it's churnalism under their name. Of course, reputation management is Maximatic's business; their Wikipedia page creation service is listed under the wonderful sub-heading "Mastering Online Reputation Management". ☆ Bri ( talk) 17:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
https://maximaticmedia.com/twitter-username-claims/ "our Media Partner representative at Twitter and await their approval." Sorry, maybe a Media Partner representative at CNN or White House? This smells of scam. Only an idiot would risk employment at Twitter for this travesty. These aren't playing with you. Fired, and black listed till no-one will hire you again. Why, it's illegal actions. Fraud. Gamma1138 ( talk) 22:12, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
To quote edit summaries I am his assistant. I have updated more about him
and This is the real version for yousuf Bhailok. I am his election campaign manager
, both left while turning the article into a hagiography.
81.187.192.168 (
talk)
18:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
This user has been adding advertising (or at least very spammy Title Case Industry Jargon) to this article. No communication; reversal is met with instant reversion. Coming here to avoid 3RR issues. 81.187.192.168 ( talk) 20:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
User has edited an article that is apparently about themself despite a prior warning about a potential conflict of interest. Jdcomix ( talk) 15:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
I received a message on my talk page on Simple English Wikipedia which led to this discussion also on Simple English Wikipedia about user Nuel Jr. Copying information here for those interested and notified the person who pinged me to email evidence to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. CNMall41 ( talk) 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Without having seen any external evidence, I was considering blocking the account as a spam account. It has an extensive history of blatantly promotional editing, so much so that It's remarkable that he's got away with it for so long. JBW ( talk) 08:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Nine pages created by this editor have been deleted as promotional, by various administrators. Others probably should be deleted. JBW ( talk) 10:13, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
I have now checked the editor's page creations, and deleted two more of them as promotional. There is one more draft, which in my opinion is promotional-ish, but not enough to justify speedy deletion. JBW ( talk) 10:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
The latest undeclared paid editor on this article appears to have a single goal – removal of the UPE template at the top. It was removed without comment by them as their first ever edit, and removed again without comment as their second. They then made a series of very minor edits culminating with the removal of the template again. Once more (wrongly, I should've come here at this point, I put my hands up to it) it was removed this time saying that their small changes of capitalisation and word order meant that the UPE tag no longer applied, and again with the same reasoning.
I'm done here, as I should've been about 4 edits on the article ago, but would like others to take a look if possible. 81.187.192.168 ( talk) 11:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
I am member of the Houma Language Project. We are a volunteer-led group of community members and linguists passionately focused on the reclamation and reconstruction of the Indigenous Houma language which was spoken in south Louisiana. In addition, we focus on cultural activities and archival documentation of the history of the Houma people and language.
As a result of our work and our expertise, we have noticed a myriad of pages on Wikipedia relating to Indigenous peoples of Louisiana, especially the Houma, that do not reflect existing published resources and lack substantive and in some cases accurate information. To remedy this, I volunteered to create a Wikipedia account on behalf of the project in early June. I made an error in that I created the account for use by the Houma Language Project team as a group, which I now understand to be in violation of Wikipedia's account policy. This has been rectified in that now I will be using the account as an individual, and the username has been changed to reflect this. However, I have received confusing and unsubstantiated mandates from several editors to not edit pages directly but instead to post edit requests (please see the User talk page). It has not explained why this would constitute a COI under Wikipedia guidelines but has instead placed the onus on me to seek an explanation for an arbitrarily dictated ruleset not clearly outlined (to the best of my knowledge) under Wikipedia's own terms.
Houma Language Project is neither a for-profit business, an incorporated non-profit, nor a tribe-affiliated entity at the time of writing. We are a group of individuals who have decided to dedicate our time to work together on the language. No one is an employee of the Houma Language Project, and as such, there is no possibility of payment in exchange for editing on Wikipedia. In addition, the COI guidelines were clearly written to avoid self-promotion and the entangelement of financial and business relationships with editing on Wikipedia. It has not been demonstrated to me how the editing of pages about the language and the Houma people, rather than, for example, a page about the Houma Language Project itself, while operating under Wikipedia's terms (such as using neutral language and acceptable references) coincides with any of these conflicts and constitutes promotion or advocacy of a particular point-of-view.
- User:Uma' Anũpa' ( talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:23, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
I came across an interesting situation and wanted to make sure this doesn't represent an unusual variation on a paid COI. See the talk page for Nthurs for details. In short, they are a student at the school and are unpaid but acting under the direction of the dean's office. I asked them to follow the unpaid COI rules but may be mistaken. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 23:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
if they are directed or expected to edit Wikipedia as part of an internship, they must disclose. But this doesn't look like an internship in the traditional sense; these sorts of volunteer groups can almost function as pseudo-student clubs. There might be perks (such as bowling or escape room trips), but I'm a bit hesitant to label it as compensation for purposes of our policy—I'd struggle to see how it is different than a professor who is running a WikiEd class that happens to have dinner at his/her home one night or hosts a catered classroom edit-a-thon.
On the article Harlette, LuxuryUK72 has added content about the subject in a promotional tone, as well as on King's College London. Since the article subject operates a UK-based company called Harlette Luxury Lingerie & Swimwear, this username may be a reference to the company. With these two factors in mind, I gave LuxuryUK72 a COI warning on their talk page. Said user, however, has ignored this warning and continued to re-add the promotional content to these two articles, while adding snide comments on my talk page such as "clearly you have no understanding." Therefore, I'm opening up this case for investigation from more experienced users.-- Panian513 02:52, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
The user account was registered nearly two years ago, and the very first edit was to create a draft on Classic Tech, a business in Nepal. Since then, the user's almost entire edit history Special:Contributions/Sujandahal76 has to do with this draft, or discussions about it. (They have more recently diversified into a couple of other topics, so can't call them quite SPA.) Paid editing has been queried on the user's talk page, previously by another editor and most recently by me, but the user denies it. However, off-Wiki evidence (and I'll say no more, so as not to out anyone) shows that an individual, whose name matches the user name of this editor, works at Classic Tech. My contention is that either the edit history or the user name could just about be coincidences, but put together the more likely explanation is UPE. -- DoubleGrazing ( talk) 08:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Poppodoms seems to be a Wikipedia:Single-purpose account dedicated to creating articls related to Huawei such as BiSheng compiler, Cangjie (programming language), ArkTS, Ark Compiler, ArkUI, HarmonyOS NEXT, HarmonyOS kernel and more. I added a {{COI}} template on the Cangjie page which seems to have upset him as he wrote on my user page that I have 24 hours to remove it or else he will get other wiki mods to challenge it, one minute later an IP address removed the COI template and 3 minutes later the IP address wrote that my page that it has been "it has been resolved", 1 minute later Poppodoms responded thanking said IP address and wrote an unfounded statement about "discrimination and racism needs to stop". Frap ( talk) 21:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
This account, DollyQuire ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), is most likely a UPE. They have interest in Pakistani politics, created a biography of obscure "independent film director", and an obscure Saudi event sourced with press releases, InFlavour. Maybe we can draftify InFlavour? I also found this ad by InFlavour when I did a Google Search (accessible once you register on the site). 217.165.8.38 ( talk) 16:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
It appears that Jonmsweeney has been editing in violation of the clear conflict of interest for many years. If they are not Jon M. Sweeney then they should probably be blocked for using that person's name as their username. If they are Jon Sweeney or closely connected to him then have edited in violation of that conflict of interest many, many times despite being warned several times on their User Talk page. Examples of edits that appear to be problematic include:
These edits have been occurring since 2017. They did pause for about two years but they began again today. These edits are not acceptable and they must cease, one way or another. ElKevbo ( talk) 19:24, 14 July 2024 (UTC)