Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. (For help, see Wikipedia:Purge) This Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (COIN) page is for determining whether a specific editor has a conflict of interest (COI) for a specific article and whether an edit by a COIN-declared COI editor meets a requirement of the Conflict of Interest guideline. A conflict of interest may occur when an editor has a close personal or business connection with article topics. Post here if you are concerned that an editor has a COI, and is using Wikipedia to promote their own interests at the expense of neutrality. For content disputes, try proposing changes at the article talk page first and otherwise follow the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution procedural policy.
You must notify any editor who is the subject of a discussion. You may use {{subst:coin-notice}} ~~~~ to do so.
Additional notes: This page should only be used when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue, such as when an editor has repeatedly added problematic material over an extended period. Do not post personal information about other editors here without their permission. Non-public evidence of a conflict of interest can be emailed to paid-en-wpwikipedia.org for review by a functionary. If in doubt, you can contact an individual functionary or the Arbitration Committee privately for advice. The COI guideline does not absolutely prohibit people with a connection to a subject from editing articles on that subject. Editors who have such a connection can still comply with the COI guideline by discussing proposed article changes first, or by making uncontroversial edits. COI allegations should not be used as a "trump card" in disputes over article content. However, paid editing without disclosure is prohibited. Consider using the template series {{Uw-paid1}} through {{Uw-paid4}}. Your report or advice request regarding COI incidents should include diff links and focus on one or more items in the COI guideline. In response, COIN may determine whether a specific editor has a COI for a specific article. There are three possible outcomes to your COIN request: 1. COIN consensus determines that an editor has a COI for a specific article. In response, the relevant article talk pages may be tagged with {{Connected contributor}}, the article page may be tagged with {{COI}}, and/or the user may be warned via {{subst:uw-coi|Article}}. 2. COIN consensus determines that an editor does not have a COI for a specific article. In response, editors should refrain from further accusing that editor of having a conflict of interest. Feel free to repost at COIN if additional COI evidence comes to light that was not previously addressed. 3. There is no COIN consensus. Here, Lowercase sigmabot III will automatically archive the thread when it is older than 14 days. Once COIN declares that an editor has a COI for a specific article, COIN (or a variety of other noticeboards) may be used to determine whether an edit by a COIN-declared COI editor meets a requirement of the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline.
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: Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests User talk:174.57.42.161 Talk:A Time Called You Talk:A&P Talk:Advanced Research and Invention Agency Talk:Bashir Al-Hashimi Talk:James F. Allen (businessman) Talk:American Water Works Talk:Anaxam Talk:Florence Ashley Talk:Astex Pharmaceuticals Talk:Avia Solutions Group Talk:Roy Bahat Talk:Bank of Greene County Talk:Marc Benioff Talk:William Bolcom Talk:Brookfield Corporation Talk:Brookfield Properties Talk:Mike Cannon-Brookes Talk:Carbon Trust Talk:Sukhinder Singh Cassidy Talk:Sonia Chang-Díaz Talk:Change Healthcare Talk:Character.ai Talk:Chicago Board Options Exchange Talk:Chime (company) Talk:Citadel Securities Talk:Civic Hall at Union Square Talk:Slaid Cleaves Talk:Cohen Milstein Talk:Aaron Cohen-Gadol Talk:The Culinary Institute of America Talk:Dahua Technology Talk:Dark Castle Entertainment Talk:Paul Devlin (filmmaker) Talk:Daniel Diermeier Talk:DISA (company) Talk:Dixy Chicken Talk:Ed Dodds Talk:Dogwoof Talk:Mary Baker Eddy Talk:ESAB Talk:Ex Libris Group Talk:Far East Organization Talk:Scott Farquhar Talk:Fastly Talk:Randy Fine Talk:Anne Finucane Talk:Florida Power & Light Talk:Bryan Fogel Talk:Forecasting Love and Weather Talk:John Freund (business executive) Talk:Bradley Fried Talk:Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media Talk:Judy Genshaft Talk:Geotab Talk:GetYourGuide Talk:GLX Digital Talk:GoDigital Media Group Talk:Colin Goldberg Talk:Grail (company) Talk:Green Line (TRAX) Talk:Kenneth C. Griffin Talk:Grove Collaborative Talk:Gulliver Preparatory School Talk:Shashi Gupta Talk:H.B. Fuller Talk:Holly Ham Talk:Henley & Partners Talk:Heterodox Academy Talk:Eric Hippeau Talk:History of the Jews in Charleston, South Carolina Talk:Index Ventures Talk:Industrious Talk:Infillion Talk:Institutional Venture Partners Talk:International Churches of Christ Talk:Sultan Al Jaber Talk:Simcha Jacobovici Talk:Valerie Jarrett Talk:Jefferson Awards for Public Service Talk:Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies Talk:Edward D. "Ted" Jones Talk:Amitabh Kant Talk:Jeffrey Katzenberg Talk:KieranTimberlake Talk:King School Talk:King the Land Talk:Karl Lagerfeld Talk:LD (cigarette) Talk:Dion Lee Talk:Jeffrey Leiden Talk:Martin Lewis (financial journalist) Talk:Library of Congress Subject Headings Talk:Robert Luciano User talk:Lvhjr Talk:Geoffrey von Maltzahn Talk:Masdar Talk:McCain Institute Talk:Metlifecare Talk:Christos Metskas Talk:MoneyWeek Talk:MP Materials Talk:Neuroscience Research Australia Talk:NextEra Energy Talk:Nintendo European Research & Development Talk:David Nirenberg Talk:Nondestructive Evaluation 4.0 Talk:Oasis Management Talk:OneHope Talk:Operating system Talk:Oregon Public Broadcasting Talk:Orphan Train Talk:Orphanage Talk:OUTtv (Canadian TV channel) Talk:Dana G. Peleg Talk:Perkins Eastman Talk:Pershing Square Capital Management Talk:Pinger Talk:Pink Ribbon (snooker) Talk:Matthew Pittinsky Talk:Programming language Talk:Pure Storage Talk:Qiagen Talk:Quantitative storytelling Talk:Shlomo Rakib Talk:Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership Talk:Revel Transit Talk:Eric Rubin Talk:Roland Rudd Talk:Jay Ruderman Talk:Rick Sanchez (journalist) Talk:Scandia (theme parks) Talk:Stephen Schlesinger Talk:Schott AG Talk:Milton Shedd Talk:Joanna Shields, Baroness Shields Talk:Site Number 4 Mnt 85 Talk:Dragan Šolak (businessman) Talk:SolidWorks Talk:SoundExchange Talk:South Fort Myers High School Talk:SSENSE Talk:Subway (restaurant) Talk:A. G. Sulzberger Talk:Sysco Talk:Joseph Tabrikian Talk:TaskUs Talk:Tencent Talk:The Peninsula Hotels Talk:The Red Sleeve Talk:Topps Talk:Jean-Pascal Tricoire Talk:Edward Trobaugh Talk:Maria-Ana Tupan Talk:Turo (company) Talk:UK Biobank Talk:Carla Ulbrich Talk:United Launch Alliance Talk:United States Postal Service Talk:Veris Residential Talk:Versapay Talk:Terry Wahls Talk:Dashun Wang Talk:Washington University Medical Center Talk:Joey Wat Talk:Mark Weisbrot Talk:Thomas Albert Work Talk:Sam Yagan Talk:Zero-day vulnerability Talk:Zions Bancorporation

Howard Gittis

Resolved

 – User blocked. Netalarm^talk 04:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

• Howard Gittis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Alicebackwards (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

It is being alleged that this a case where the subject's ex-wife is trashing the subject with NPOV violations. The s.p.a. making the allegations freely admits to being a friend of the family on the subject's side. Orange Mike | Talk 16:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I can't keep up with Alicebackwards' disruptive edits. I've posted vandalism warnings 2 and 3 on her Talk page. She continues to post. Can someone please block her?--Bbb23 (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

After repeated section and page blankings, an admin blocked the editor's account.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Ryoung122 on Longevity myths

The editor declares on his user page that he is involved with Guiness World Records. He obviously has a lot of expertise that could be very valuable for the encyclopedia, but in his work on Longevity myths and related articles, he seems to be too close to the subject to see the wood for the trees. It is all just messy. There is a medcab case open, and I made a merge proposal. I came to it from WP:FTN, and am not the only person concerned about the quality of these articles. I'm hoping that the COI question can be addressed effectively but without completely alienating this expert editor. Itsmejudith (talk) 10:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Actually we see Itsmejudith canvassing on Wikipedia:

Longevity myths

What on earth do we do? The article is battled between two sides, and each seems to be as mistaken as the other. (tears at hair) Itsmejudith (talk) 18:24, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Not surprisingly, the editor she posted this message to (Grismaldo) ended up on the merge discussion.Ryoung122 15:23, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I was frustrated, as you can tell, and this was a request and plea to work out what could be done. We had already discussed this on FTN on more than one occasion and I've asked for more eyes on the article. I'm genuinely looking for a solution. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:29, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

IMJ posted that comment after I was already engaged in the discussion at the FT/N. There was no canvassing there at all.Griswaldo (talk) 16:49, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

By the way, the essay I wrote on Longevity Myths in 2005 preceded Guinness hiring me in November 2005, so there's no real conflict of interest.

As for my essay, it's been published online and won a national award as a thesis, and published as a book. But in reality it did little more than to more clearly state and merge in one place what had been said for years in separate accounts. We find articles about the myths of longevity in Russia, in Japan, etc. It's not simply the colloquial myth: the stories of Japanese longevity related to the emperors and the crypto-historical founding of Japan in 660 BC (when in was in fact closer to 420 AD). In Russia, the myths of longevity are collective, group myths, that are intertwined with religious and ethnic beliefs, just as are stories of extreme longevity in the Bible.

And if recent claims to be extreme age are also called "myths," there's a reason the word is plural.

I have a solution. Let's withdraw the merge proposal, and then we need a discussion between the "scientific" POV and the "Christian" point of view. It may be as simple as renaming the article "longevity myths and traditions" and then everyone can assume/presume whether Methuselah is a "myth" or "tradition" (or both).Ryoung122 15:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

It's clear that you want an article that covers everything from the Sumerian king lists to 20th century reports. I can't see that it can possibly be helpful. But that's for the article talk page, and perhaps needs to go to an RfC. I would be really grateful for uninvolved input on the COI question. Itsmejudith (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I would recommend interested parties view this and more particularly this about when Ryoung122 claimed a living person had died based on the word of an anonymous British government source, and was forced to retract it after complaints from her family. Considering we are quite often dealing with living people, the whole sourcing about supercentenarians is unacceptable in my opinion, particularly when a Yahoo group is being used to source people's deaths. O Fenian (talk) 15:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The second link it particularly dismaying. BLP information should certainly not be handled in this manner. I won't comment on the COI as I don't think I'm uninvolved at this point, but I get the feeling that articles related to supercentenarians need much more outside scrutiny than they have been getting. Apparently they are written and maintained strictly by members of that yahoo group who now appear (see above) to apply their own standards of sourcing to this area of the project as well.Griswaldo (talk) 16:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Whoa! An IP claims that Robert Young is blatantly breaking canvassing rules! If a user with access can confirm this, he'd better retract quick if he wants to stay on this IMHO. I'll chime in later with relevant history. O Fenian is right on point, but that is just one way that WP:WOP operates as an arm of GRG/OHB/GWR interests rather than WP interests. JJB 16:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Uninvolved people may also like to note that Ryoung122 has been discussed on this noticeboard before. Itsmejudith (talk) 16:56, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Links?Griswaldo (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Previous appearance on this noticeboard

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 32#Longevity myths, Longevity claims, etc.

He used to have his own article, now deleted

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Robert_Young_(gerontologist)

He's a suspected sockpuppeteer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Ryoung122

Discussions at ANI too.

I just did a search on Ryoung122 and then checked "Everything" to get the WP pages up.

In one case the arb Carcaroth said he could work with him, so perhaps we should drop him a line about it. I'm about to go off-wiki. Itsmejudith (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I improved Judith's first link above, because the evidence is almost all there. Basically I found Ryoung122 in Apr/May 09 doing exactly what he had been indeffed for, and what he promised not to do as a removal condition after 9 months of block, i.e., preserving his field POV as WP's, extensively and uncivilly. I was also going to add that last month he stepped back from the brink of edit warring after 3 reverts each on 2 articles, and agreed to mediation, which started well until our mediator disappeared on 1 Oct. That is, the last couple weeks he's (either been absent or) behaved much better than any time prior; but now I can't say that either, because there is credible evidence he's canvassing. IMHO, as long as all parties work to build scope consensus on these articles, it doesn't matter if he or other conflicted Yahoo-group members are blocked or not (see WP:WOP talk!); but I would really prefer guidance (please see my last graf on Judith's COIN link) about what to do with those who don't seek to build WP consensus but seek to bring unsourced, OR/SYN, POV consensus from Yahoo-WOP and preserve it at WP. So much evidence that I don't care to list it except for interested requests. Oh, the book Ryoung122 mentions sells for over $100, another COI, which is why I finally succeeded in pulling (or occasionally wikifying) much of the book's OR contents (about 70 sentences) from the article. JJB 21:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Board, is this well-formed, well-evidenced case going to go the way of the last one, where COI was found unequivocally and then ... nothing whatsoever happened? Thank you. JJB 14:08, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm going to drop a line to Carcaroth, on his (?her) talk page. Itsmejudith (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

In the meantime, we really need some regulars on this board to provide uninvolved input. Pretty please. Itsmejudith (talk) 07:37, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Update He is now trying to use his own master's thesis as proof that the article discusses a viable subject matter. See here. There is a clear COI here.Griswaldo (talk) 20:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

EDAG

• EDAG (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 212.184.214.131 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Multiple edits with a self-promotional tone from an IP that is registered to the subject of the article. Simon Brady (talk) 11:58, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Harold Lewis

• Harold_Lewis (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• William_M._Connolley (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User William M Connolly is a prominent advocate of a particular stance on climate change, and expends significant effort preventing the expression of facts that are unfavourable to his cause. The recent incident on the Hal Lewis page is a perfect example. WP:RS has been wilfully misused to attempt to prevent mention of a senior physicists condemnation of Connolly (amongst others). This is not an isolated incident, but standard behaviour of the editor in question. 94.170.107.247 (talk) 13:48, 13 October 2010 (UTC) Josh

There was no misuse of WP:RS. The reg is not a reliable source in general, since most of their articles contain blatant editorializing, even when they aren't editorials. The problem was solved by adding an actual reliable source for the incident. So I don't see a problem there. On-wiki, WMC has been mostly fair in his treatment of the situation. Furthermore, WMC is less than 24 hours from being banned from Climate Change articles here, so what's the point of making yet more efforts to sanction him. Sailsbystars (talk) 14:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I'd disagree about el Reg being a reliable source for factual statements, but this isn't the place and wasn't the point. In light of the pending ban, I've evidently wasted your time here - my apologies. I had a look at the arbitration stuff regarding WMC, but it's not very clear where to look or what has been decided. It appeared to me - although evidently I misread - that arbitration was complete and he was still doing the same thing. 94.170.107.247 (talk) 14:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC) Josh

By my reading, the epic climate change case should close at 20:31 UTC today, barring any new developments. Not sure how long it takes these things to take effect though. Sailsbystars (talk) 14:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

James Graham Founding Director of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tucson

• James Graham Founding Director of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tucson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• "Jayne", soliciting edits via craigslist, likely to be Paynekillerjayne (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Replace this with a brief explanation of the situation. 206.53.157.132 (talk) 17:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Per the link, somebody is soliciting "to hire someone to edit/correct a Wikipedia page. We do not have the time or patience or skill to do this our selves. We have several other articles that need to be posted…" —C.Fred (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

I have added a note about the situation to Talk:James Graham Founding Director of the Museum of Contemporary Art, Tucson. —C.Fred (talk) 18:01, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Gloria Kovach

• Gloria Kovach (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Gloria Kovach (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I've made no extensive investigation, but other users have noted issues in edit summaries and on GK's talk page, and GK's edits appear to be non trivial. me_and 20:40, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Ian_Scott_(producer)

• Ian_Scott_(producer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Found this wiki page to overlap with the person's personal blog: http://mjpianscott.blogspot.com/2008/03/ian-scott-mark-jackson-productions.html Also found it may violate Wikipedia:Notability. 169.229.123.24 (talk) 21:07, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

www.softpicks.net

There is job on http://www.freelancer.com to spam links to http://www.softpicks.net from Wikipedia articles, see http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Link-Building-Blog/Links-from-social-networks.html (You will have to create a free account in order to view this)

Description

I need to write a review about our website and post it on most popular social networks with backward links:

Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Linkedin, Classmates, MyLife, Ning, LiveJournal, Tagged. Review should be open for SE bots. Review should be written on languages: English, Spanish, German, French, Italian and posted on appropriate language versions of these websites with appropriate links to our website language versions. Also we need a wikipedia articles on these languages. The main features of the website to be reviewed: "Flash games", "Answers", "DLL downloads", "Driver downloads", "Software downloads". The site URL is www[dot]softpicks[dot]net.

Search for "Softpicks" reveals a few spamming links and mention of the term in a few articles for deletion. There is currently no article "Softpicks". Fred Talk 22:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

The Softpick link is totally useless, because Softpicks is an anonymous hoax website. They don't have any "About Us" section anywhere, they don't say who they are, the only way of contacting them is via the web form (a very common feature of hoax and spammers' websites), the Disclaimer, Terms of Use and other sections are "Under construction". This is not a new tactic in Wikipedia—spammers are constantly trying to put links to hoax websites like this in the hopes of fooling Wikipedians into thinking these references are somehow relevant. But the Softpick link clearly does not count as a reliable source for Wikipedia.—J. M. (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2010 (UTC) From Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Need4_Video_Converter

Fred Talk 22:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Using LinkSearch shows that no links in articles remain (good!). Johnuniq (talk) 02:59, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Ericmelse

• Momentum Accounting and Triple-Entry Bookkeeping (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Ericmelse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Melse is a teacher at a business college, and a subject-matter expert. He has been filling articles (particularly Momentum Accounting and Triple-Entry Bookkeeping) with links to articles he has written, YouTube videos he has created, etc. Orange Mike | Talk 15:11, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

BONN

From the deleted article Black Online News Network

Black Online News Network (BONN) is a digital network of online news portals targeted to African Americans. Its current consists of 100 news websites.

References

There have been attempts to create articles by the firm itself and by editors hired by it through Freelancer.Com: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:DeletedContributions/Black_maaan and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Black_Media_Month&action=history

The BONN group is at http://www.thebonngroup.com/ The site supports itself by selling ads which are placed on all of 100 web sites created by the group; Black Finance Today http://www.africanamericandaily.com/index.php?site_id=87 is typical; it essentially has no traffic http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/africanamericandaily.com despite being advertised as one of "100 popular web sites." See Media Kit.

The one existing article which was created and not deleted has only press releases by the BONN group as references and not enough activity to have an Alexa rating http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/blackmediamonth.com Fred Talk 23:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The user has also spammed links to another site, which may be seen here and here. Also note that this user has been previously warned about paid editing (spam) here, but the warning was removed. Due to the abundance of non-notable articles this user has created and the number of spam links the user has placed, I also believe that he engaged in paid editing. While paid editing doesn't result in consequences, spamming and promoting non-notable subjects does. It appears that Mohamed Ouda is an administrator and bureaucrat at the Arabic Wikipedia.

Note: I've nominated the remaining article for deletion, as I was not able to find significant coverage on the topic using Google. Appears to be non-notable. Netalarm^talk 04:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

40 Wall Street

• 40 Wall Street (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Oakwood Law Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Hotsummer 9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User is adding excessive and irrelevant promotional detail about Oakwood Law Group to the article about 40 Wall Street, the landmark building in which it is a tenant. Has also created the (so far unreviewed) article Oakwood Law Group. Note that in January this user created Oakwood Law Group, llp, which was speedy deleted four times. I'm not an admin so I can't see how similar the old and new articles are. --CliffC (talk) 15:11, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The problematic content added by the user to 40 Wall Street was removed by the reporter, and the other article has been tagged for deletion. I've watchlisted both pages in case Hotsummer 9 doesn't read the warning and continues to add such content back. Upon further checking of the user's contributions, I've found that he's been linking to novelguide.com on various pages. I've reported this spam linking to the spam project, as the site is too commercial and annoying (users are forced to view a video before they're allowed to read the content, advertisements are everywhere). See this for all pages that link to the site. @Hotsummer9, if you have any questions on why your addition was removed, feel free to raise them here. Netalarm^talk 03:53, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Steven T. Murray

• Steven T. Murray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Tiina Nunnally (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Osobooks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

As I mentioned at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive96#Steven T. Murray, user Osobooks might well be Steven T. Murray, whose article he has edited significantly without including citations (as well as reverting my own edits to the article which were well sourced). Osobooks has not responded to a COI warning placed by another user at User talk:Osobooks, or to the issue I raised at Talk:Steven T. Murray. Mathew5000 (talk) 03:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Exstreamer

• Exstreamer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Clock twibright (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This is an advertisement, and all the links surrounding it are simply to promote products made by, and sold by BARIX AG. All the reference links are self promoting as well.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oemengr (talk • contribs)

Note: The reporting user has created userspace draft on a competing product, which is also promotional in nature. The draft is currently being reviewed at requests for feedback. Please note that promotional articles and articles on non-notable products/companies are not allowed on Wikipedia, so both of these articles will be cleaned up shortly. Netalarm^talk 21:17, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Paul Spiring

• Paul Spiring (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 90.213.127.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 90.197.132.56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 81.26.170.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 90.213.127.253 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 94.5.235.31 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Tedsherrell (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This has been raised before, but doesn't seem fully resolved. The article inflates the subject's notability - the guy is a schoolteacher who has written/cowritten a few niche books - and its editing is dominated by a series of single-purpose IP edits that have solely edited this article and ones pertaining to Paul Spiring's books (see these links :[1]. Replace this with a brief explanation of the situation. 86.141.82.111 (talk) 09:00, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Tablo, and "Whatbecomes."

• Tablo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Whatbecomes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

There is controversy regarding the authenticity of hip hop artist, Tablo's, graduation report from Stanford and whether he really did in fact graduate with a Degree in English. The Administrator of the main group that is responsible for investigating these claims goes under the nickname of "whatbecomes." The situation regarding the controversy has died down in recent days/weeks as more evidence are mounting in support of Tablo. In the editing history of the article, a person under the nickname "Whatbecomes" has been editing the article to remove such indications of the changing opinions in South Korea towards this issue, towards one of sympathy. There is an obvious conflict of interest, in regards as to the motives of "Whatbecomes" are obviously to stir up more controversy. Korea Herald Article on Controversy (ShushKebab (talk) 14:58, 19 October 2010 (UTC))

The report you've linked now shows that he has proven that he indeed did graduate from Stanford, and another editor has made changes to reflect that. It appears that the issue is resolved. I've also removed mention to the online community created against him, as it is not notable in its own right and takes the focus away from the subject of the article - article is about Tablo, not the online community. The content was also added by users with a conflict of interest. Watchlisted in case anything else shows up. Netalarm^talk 22:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Raw Energy Records

• Raw Energy Records (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• KnightGraeme (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This diff [2] discloses being the founder of this record label. Kansan (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

It seems that the user is interested in updating the article so that it lists every artist that the labal has worked with, including several non-notable ones. I've removed the non-notable ones, as they do not add to the quality of the article. If the author wants to add more information to the article, he's free to do so, but it is strongly suggested that he discuss his edits on the talk page first. I would suggest more information on the label, not a list of the artists the label has worked with. Watchlisted in case anything else shows up. Netalarm^talk 22:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Jonathan M. Stone

• Jonathan M. Stone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Stone.iphone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

COI - Autobiography, self serving, not what you would find in an encyclopedia... Should be a personal website or blog... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danjenkinsjr (talk • contribs)

I've proposed the article for deletion, as the assertions of notability made in the article could not be verified through external sources. Only substantial contributor was Stone.iphone, who has only edited pages related to the topic. Netalarm^talk 23:06, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Dr. James Cantor's edit on hebephilia

Dr. Cantor was offended that I declared he has a conflict of interest on that article. As documented in his biography here, Dr. Cantor is a coauthor of the proposal to introduce hebephilia in the DSM-5. This proposal has received criticism from a number of mental health professionals, look here for a partial list. Dr. Cantor has personally removed one such criticism (sourced to forensic psychologist Karen Franklin) from the article on hebephilia, and added none. Is this edit a violation of WP:COI or not? Tijfo098 (talk) 23:59, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

• First, I edit WP quite openly, under my real name, and with long-standing disclosures on my userpage about any assocations I have that other editors might think relevant. Whether that is the behavior of someone trying to hide any conflicts is up to others to decide.
• Second, I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with anyone criticizing anything I have written in WP or in the real world and covered by WP. I care only that WP policies are followed, as it is my experience that following the rules is all that is necessary for the truth to come out.
• Third, the criticism I deleted was from a blog, which does not meet the criteria for an RS[3]
• Fourth, I immediately posted on the talkpage discussing my edit and my associations [4]
• And finally, when the author of the blog (Karen Franklin) published her first peer-reviewed paper about hebephilia, her status as an expert (by WP definition) potentially changed, making her WP:SPS potentially an RS, I myself wrote that it made COI problems unavoidable on the talkpage[5] and I ceased editing the section.

Whether all of this is actually a stale issue is also up to other editors to opin.

— James Cantor (talk) 00:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)