Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

"WP:COIN" redirects here. For the WikiProject on articles about coins, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics.

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 Talk:James F. Allen (businessman) Talk:American Council on Education Talk:American Water Works Talk:Anaxam Talk:Florence Ashley Talk:Astex Pharmaceuticals Talk:Roy Bahat Talk:Bank of Greene County Talk:Rich Barton Talk:Bastion (agency) Talk:Bending Spoons Talk:Marc Benioff Talk:Bound (2023 film) Talk:Breyers Talk:Brookfield Properties Talk:Burford Capital Talk:Mike Cannon-Brookes Talk:Sukhinder Singh Cassidy Talk:Sonia Chang-Díaz Talk:Change Healthcare Talk:Character.ai Talk:Chime (company) Talk:Sujit Choudhry Talk:Citadel Securities Talk:Civic Hall at Union Square Talk:Slaid Cleaves Talk:CoBank Talk:Cohen Milstein Talk:Aaron Cohen-Gadol Talk:Community-engaged research Talk:The Culinary Institute of America Talk:Dahua Technology Talk:Louis DeJoy Talk:Paul Devlin (filmmaker) Talk:Nina L. Diaz Talk:Daniel Diermeier Talk:DISA (company) Talk:Dixy Chicken Talk:Ed Dodds Talk:Double Union Talk:Earth Journalism Network Talk:Mary Baker Eddy Talk:EF Education First Talk:ESAB Talk:Ex Libris Group Talk:Far East Organization Talk:Farm Credit Council Talk:Farm Credit of New Mexico Talk:Scott Farquhar Talk:Fastly 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:Kellie Gerardi Talk:GetYourGuide Talk:GLX Digital Talk:GoDigital Media Group Talk:Colin Goldberg Talk:Grail (company) Talk:Steven Grinspoon Talk:Grove Collaborative Talk:Shashi Gupta Talk:H.B. Fuller Talk:Holly Ham Talk:Jacob Helberg Talk:Henley & Partners Talk:Heterodox Academy Talk:Eric Hippeau Talk:Human Appeal 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:Edward D. "Ted" Jones Talk:Michael Jones (entrepreneur) Talk:Jeffrey Katzenberg Talk:King the Land Talk:A. Gary Klesch Talk:Chris Kubecka Talk:Karl Lagerfeld Talk:LD (cigarette) Talk:Dion Lee Talk:Jeffrey Leiden Talk:Dafna Lemish Talk:Ronnie Liang Talk:Library of Congress Subject Headings Talk:List of people from Darwin Talk:List of University of Queensland people Talk:Robert Luciano Talk:Geoffrey von Maltzahn Talk:Masdar Talk:McCain Institute Talk:Media.Monks Talk:Metlifecare Talk:Christos Metskas Talk:MoneyWeek Talk:MP Materials Talk:Netvibes Talk:Neuroscience Research Australia Talk:List of New School people Talk:NextEra Energy Talk:Nondestructive Evaluation 4.0 Talk:Oasis Management Talk:Olivier Cornet Gallery Talk:OneHope Talk:Oregon Public Broadcasting Talk:OUTtv (Canadian TV channel) Talk:V Pappas Talk:Dana G. Peleg Talk:Gregory Pence Talk:Perkins Eastman Talk:Pershing Square Capital Management Talk:Pink Ribbon (snooker) Talk:Matthew Pittinsky Talk:Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Talk:Profire Energy Talk:Pure Storage Talk:Qiagen Talk:Quantitative storytelling Talk:Shlomo Rakib Talk:Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership Talk:Revel Transit Talk:Revolut Talk:Eric Rubin Talk:Roland Rudd Talk:Jay Ruderman Talk:Rick Sanchez (journalist) Talk:Scandia (theme parks) Talk:Stephen Schlesinger Talk:Schott AG Talk:Science Inc. Talk:Milton Shedd Talk:Site Number 4 Mnt 85 Talk:Dragan Šolak (businessman) Talk:SolidWorks Talk:SoundExchange Talk:South Fort Myers High School Talk:Space Capital Talk:Spotfire Talk:Squishmallows Talk:A. G. Sulzberger Talk:Sysco Talk:TaskUs Talk:Tenants and Owners Development Corporation Talk:Tencent Talk:The Red Sleeve Talk:Theatre Development Fund Talk:Topps Talk:Traton Talk:Jean-Pascal Tricoire Talk:Edward Trobaugh Talk:Maria-Ana Tupan Talk:UK Biobank Talk:Carla Ulbrich Talk:United Launch Alliance Talk:United States Postal Service Talk:UnitedHealth Group Talk:Up TV Talk:Bulat Utemuratov Talk:Veris Residential Talk:Versapay Talk:Terry Wahls Talk:Dashun Wang Talk:Washington University Medical Center Talk:Joey Wat Talk:Mark Weisbrot Talk:Xavier University Talk:Sam Yagan Talk:Yelp Talk:Zero-day vulnerability Talk:Zions Bancorporation

Iridium Communications

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

Someone is apparently copypasting info from promotional material into the article.

Rossy Evelin Lima

• Rossy Evelin Lima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Grldpadilla (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This article appears to have been created and constantly updated by the subject's spouse, Gerald A. Padilla.

Moriba Jah

• Moriba Jah (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Moribajah (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 128.62.208.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 24.155.109.168 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The author of much of the article is clearly Moriba Jah. Twice under his username, and the bulk of the edits under two IP addresses associated with Austin, TX (where Jah resides), which have both only contributed to Jah's page (since 2009). The page itself has many unsourced anecdotes that are inconstant with a wikipedia biography.

Suspected spam articles for summer

The title is only a play on words - of course there will be false positives.

Batch to 28 June

Guess what time it is? It's quarantine time! MER-C 14:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello MER-C. Is Donald Burns (businessman) not a re-creation of the Donald Burns that was deleted G5 by JzG in 2016? Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 06:50, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Same subject, vastly different content. MER-C 08:55, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Batch to 13 July

MER-C 11:00, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

Batch until 26 July

[Insert witty statement here] MER-C 15:09, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Rappaport

For your perusal. Article (which looked like this prior to AfD tag: [2]) was written by the subject himself (IP from Pittsburgh) and his friends, including this SPA who confirmed that at one point on his userpage [3] and who has uploaded 348 of Rappaport's paintings to Commons. Softlavender (talk) 00:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Softlavender: I'm assuming good faith here, but wanted to point out that this notification might cross the line into WP:CANVASSing (since I think people who follow this board would be very likely to have strong opinions against self-promo articles). creffett (talk) 01:15, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Creffett: What Softlavender is doing is not canvassing. It's good practice for editors who wish to draw a wider range of informed, but uninvolved, editors to discussions to place messages at noticeboards such as this one. I agree with you that the editors who follow this board would be very likely to have strong opinions against self-promo. But those aren't self-formed opinions. They are the result of established Wikipedia policy which forbids self promotion in articles. Regards,  Spintendo  15:48, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Spintendo, fair enough. I wasn't trying to level accusations, just was pointing out how it seemed to me at first glance. Thanks for the clarification. creffett (talk) 21:34, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Robert Maximilian de Gaynesford

• Robert Maximilian de Gaynesford (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Phenomenologuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The subject matter (literature/philosophy) is outside my "comfort zone", so could someone else look at this article. Possible COI as all edits are by a new/SPA. Certainly needs other cleanup - refs on headings, questions in the text, independent sources? etc. MB 16:17, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I have informed them of Wikipedia's COI rules, and of this discussion. TheAwesomeHwyh 17:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

I have read through the history of the article and it seems more autobiographical than paid editing. The article was mainly written by IP Address editors until Phenomenologuy started this month, although non SPAs have made minor corrections. As a full professor the subject seems notable, but the NPOV and formatting of the article need improvement. TSventon (talk) 11:22, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, the info about the photo in the infobox is described at commons as "a selfie" (and was uploaded by Phenomenologuy). MB 23:11, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

There's a distinct lack of secondary sources. Is this person even notable? --SVTCobra 00:13, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I did a bit of searching and I cant find anything on him, so I have listed the page on him for deletion here. TheAwesomeHwyh 02:18, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

• There is an even stronger indicator than that. I looked at three of the IP addresses. They all geolocated to the institutions where the article said that the article subject was working. Uncle G (talk) 18:23, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that for the IP which created the article all those years ago. --SVTCobra 18:53, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

I am new to the editing process, so forgive me if I make mistakes. I am Maximilian de Gaynesford, and my user name is Phenomenologuy. A page about me ("Robert Maximilian de Gaynesford") was added to Wikipedia without my knowledge or permission in 2005, and since I have an interest in accurate information being given about me in a public forum, and since the original article and its updates were incorrect, I corrected them myself. In subsequent years, banners have been added to the page at various times to ask for further information to improve the page, and since no one else seemed to be doing this and I was in a good position to do so, I made the necessary improvements myself. Recently, I thought it would improve the information if a photograph of myself were included, and I went through Wikipedia's steps for doing this - in the process, making it quite clear that the picture being uploaded was a selfie. The fact that I did not create the original article explains why the name itself is misleading: I actually go under 'Maximilian de Gaynesford', and if you Google that name, you will find many references to me - they will attest that I am a reasonably well-known philosopher, with a Chair at the University of Reading, four books with excellent academic presses and am invited to present my work regularly at public events, so that there is some justification for the original decision (not mine) to include an article about me on Wikipedia. I have obviously never accepted pay for this editing, and I have neither sought nor received any form of financial benefit through doing it. My sole aim has been to ensure that a page which was created by someone else and without my knowledge should be regularly improved according to the requests and requirements of Wikipedia itself. If I can be of further help in your discussion, please do not hesitate to contact me.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Phenomenologuy (talk • contribs) 09:12, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

@Phenomenologuy:, thanks for responding. It is understandable if editors are not familiar with all of Wikipedia's policies and that is part of the reason Wikipedia has notice boards like this. Firstly I suggest that you read the conflict of interest (COI) guideline, which strongly recommends that editors with a COI post to the article's talk page, rather than directly editing the article. I have added a COI notice to the article talk page. You could also read the guideline on autobiography, which explains how difficult it is to write objectively about oneself. The article has been nominated for deletion, so you could contribute to the discussion if you believe that the article should or should not be deleted. I have also posted a welcome message with more general links on your user page. TSventon (talk) 10:56, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you to TSventon for the very helpful information.Phenomenologuy (talk) 13:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Two things:

• User:Uncle G/On notability#Writing about subjects close to you — This strong advice to not write given in 2006 is tame by today's standards, where some people discourage writing even if one has independent sources in hand.
• If it were just that all of the IP addresses geolocate to the places where the subject works, I would not be concerned, as after all that is information that was being put right into the article. But some of them (including some as far back as 2005) apparently geolocate to the subject's home, residential ISPs in the same towns/cities. The Wikipedia:privacy policy carves out an exemption for this, but I do not think that anyone envisaged a case where Wikipedia would be publicly hosting a 14-year-long record of a biography subject's apparent IP addresses, work and home, as an article's edit history. (And although a few of the IP addresses are clearly not the subject, we know that fools on the WWW often aren't careful enough to check.)

Uncle G (talk) 19:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I understand Uncle G's admonition and thank them for their concern for objectivity and factual accuracy, which is precisely what prompted me to correct and update information being made public about me by Wikipedia in an article created without my knowledge or permission. I was quite happy for my IP address to be known - Wikipedia advised me that it would be - whenever I made an edit. I now know there is an alternative way to correct and update information - through the Talk page - which I will happily use in future. I am grateful to this discussion and particularly TSventon for revealing this to me. Phenomenologuy (talk) 20:26, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

• Well if you are happy about the IP addresses, that's something. I am still a little concerned on your behalf. It's an extraordinary situation, and while it is within the letter of the policy it does not seem to me to be in the spirit of it that this is the case. I've not encountered a situation like this before, although as the years accrue no doubt it will happen again, and it may have happened elsewhere that I am not aware of. Unfortunately, there's only one thing that could be done about it, should it be a problem. Uncle G (talk) 21:29, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Uncle G, what do you think. Let me know if there's more that concerns you. I've been pretty comprehensive in my search but you are smarter than me. Phenomenologuy, make sure you don't edit while logged out, OK? It's not just not OK, it's also not smart given the internet. BTW, 1968 was a good year for bald guys with glasses who do philosophy, and I salute you. Drmies (talk) 22:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
• I asked Drmies to come here and xe has oversighted several of the recent home IP addresses, leaving the edit contents and summaries visible. This alleviates my privacy concerns here. There are a few edits, such as ones from from Williamsburg in 2005 and 2006, that I suspect to be the article subject too, but given the above I am not going to fuss over them.
  • Phenomenologuy, the best thing that you can do for Wikipedia is write about something else. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pragmatic maxim has a whole load of citations that never made it onto Talk:pragmatic maxim or even into the article itself as potential further reading. You could evaluate them to see whether they are any good as further reading, on that article or otherwise, or even as sources. You do not have to write prose, but I think that you are in a good position to evaluate the relevance of some books as selected reading materials.
  • The second best thing that you can do is cite biographies of yourself or academic reviews of your works by other people in the field, if you know of any. Author autobiographical blurbs from books do not help, but a proper fully independent biography would. See User talk:Drmies#English Professor Vacuum for one recent example of a subject where there are sources from which to work for both the life and the works for a person. Yes, sometimes one has to wait until one is dead. ☺
• Uncle G (talk) 07:56, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you to Uncle G and to Drmies for your advice and good humour; I will endeavour to follow both. I'm grateful for your oversight work, which clears up some of the mess I unwittingly created. Phenomenologuy (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

• Words of truth, from when dr. de Gaynesford and I were deciding on academic career paths. Drmies (talk) 13:35, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

• I am happy to work at the best thing Uncle G and will look first at the article you have directed me to,Talk:pragmatic maxim. As regards the second best thing, I have added (a) selected academic reviews and (b) some biographical information from other sources to the Talk page for Maximilian de Gaynesford, with the request that some kind editor add this material to the article. And I'm grateful to Drmies for the timely reminder!

Phenomenologuy (talk) 14:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

• I have given an evaluation and made some recommendations concerning the literature cited for pragmatic maxim on the page Talk:pragmatic maxim; thanks to Uncle G for suggesting this.

Phenomenologuy (talk) 08:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Demandchange

• Billy Camrick Carson II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - dishonest recreation of spam
• Serviceaide (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - refbombed PR
• Ellen Nicolaisen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - deleted as Unambiguous advertising or promotion
• Graham Jules (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - sending to afd
• Catalyst Investors (U.S. Company) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - refbombed PR
• Celoxis Technologies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - removed the advert tag from own work [4]

expanded

• Hypergiant Industries (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - majorly refbombed PR from now blocked account

• Demandchange (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Celoxis Technologies - "The software expedites project management through prebuilt reporting options and customizable dashboards, which can be integrated with third-party applications"

Multiple are new articles on subjects who had articles previously deleted. Each posted at a new title to avoid connection.

Billy Camrick Carson II was previously at Billy Carson

Ellen Nicolaisen was previously at Inger Ellen Nicolaisen

Celoxis Technologies was previously at Celoxis

Catalyst Investors (U.S. Company) was previously at Catalyst Investors

Recreation of Billy Carson (and Draft:Billy Carson), a often deleted spam piece from large sock farms, is enough reason to suspect UPE. It was posted at Billy Camrick Carson II even though the sources don't use that name. This page is bombarded with spectacularly bad sources. It dishonestly uses four sources to claim songs made Billboard charts. These sources show current charts (supposedly Retrieved 2019-07-19) and can not possibly verify a claim that some songs charted last year.. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:27, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Blocked, tagged and quarantined as appropriate. MER-C 08:56, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

Ordnance Factory Board

• Ordnance Factory Board (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Article seems promotional, with an excessive number of images. This could probably be handled with normal cleanup/editing, but an IP recently added much text of a highly political/advocacy nature (and with a excessive number of citations) and removed COI template. I'm not sure how the various editors are related to each other or to the organization. MB 16:34, 26 July 2019 (UTC)

The username Proffice.ofb (PR Office OFB) seems pretty obvious to me. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:09, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I cleaned up the article a bit, and removed the big "Future" section which looked like just a cut and paste of somebody's powerpoint. A lot of the images didn't have proper licensing, so I tagged them on wikimedia. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:36, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Pages of Dr Kamakshi Hospital and Undiporadhey

• Dr._Kamakshi_Memorial_Hospital (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Pavithra12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• Undiporaadhey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Pavithra12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I suspect the mentioned pages to be paid edits. As it is disclosed here at http://digitallyvibed.com/blog/how-to-create-your-wikipedia-page/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4072:886:3adb:ddb8:f254:4bc0:755e (talk) 14:19, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Blocked, quarantined, regex salted and reverted. I quarantined the film article too, because business development = advertising. MER-C 15:00, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Autoliv

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

According to https://www.autoliv.com/news-and-media/press-contacts this user may be linked to the object of the article mentioned above. DoebLoggs (talk) 11:55, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Yes I am head of communications but I am merely updating numbers to 2018 data from 2017. Is this not as it should be? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stina Thorman (talk • contribs)

@Stina Thorman: Please be sure to review Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure policy before making any further changes to this article. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:58, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Kristen Millares Young and Red Hen Press authors

• Kristen Millares Young (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Charles Harper Webb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Ron Carlson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Kate Gale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Louise Wareham Leonard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Amy Uyematsu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Chris Tarry (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Colette Inez (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Red Hen Press (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Rhpwikichicken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User Rhpwikichicken appears to work for Red Hen Press ("Rhp" in username) and appears to currently be focused on author Kristen Millares Young, a page this user recently created. I do believe the author is notable, but I've had to go in and cut down on the promotional sounding language, and the excessive external links. Upon closer look, it appears RHP has also edited articles to improve mentions of Young ([5], [6], [7], [8]). – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 16:32, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The user's edits predate this particular article. They also made edits to Charles Harper Webb, Ron Carlson, Kate Gale, Louise Wareham Leonard, Amy Uyematsu, Chris Tarry and Colette Inez, all of whom are authors representing by this publishing company: [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]. Since the paid edit policy did not come into effect until 16 June 2014, all edits previous to it are undisclosed COI only. Everything after is undisclosed paid, unless we can determine that the editor is a volunteer. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion on my talk page has revealed that this is a volunteer, but the account has been shared. For now this is a matter for WP:UAA. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I (soft)-blocked the account after reading the admission that its credentials were being shared and passed down through the organisation, and encouraged the users to create their own accounts. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 21:06, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Ahmed Moharram

• Ahmed Moharram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Ibrahimsabotaleb120 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

My biggest concern with this editor is this edit on my talk page [16] The editor has been adding unsourced information to the article VViking_TalkEdits 17:49, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

I am Ibrahimsabotaleb120. My page "Ahmed Moharram" is as good as any other wikipedia page. It is about a public figure in Egypt (who is not alive by the way). I am not promoting any products or services. This public figure has distinguished national contributions and earned the highest awards of honor in Egypt. This is clearly reflected in the sources that I included in the page. At some point, I even attached pictures of the certificates of honor that this public figure earned (what more proof do you need than that!!). Despite that, VViking keeps deleting those contributions and honors and claims that they are unsourced (they are sourced! he/she did not read the sources, not my problem). By the way, I wrote more than 12 journal papers in the US and I know clearly how citation and adding sources works. There are many wikipedia pages that have unsourced information, and VViking is ok with them, but is not ok with my sourced page. This is clearly prejudice.

@Ibrahimsabotaleb120: Before we address the content dispute, an important practice on Wikipedia is that we assume good faith of fellow editors. Don't accuse others of harmful motives unless there is clear evidence to the contrary.

Also, to be clear, the article Ahmed Moharram is an article about that person, but it is not your article, even if you created it. No one has any right of ownership or control over an article's content. Anyone can edit an article at any time on Wikipedia.

Disagreements over content should be calmly and rationally discussed on the article talk page, where a process of discussion and compromise should result in consensus. If that does not resolve the disagreement, the steps for dispute resolution should be followed.

Question to VViking, where do you see a potential COI? This looks like more of a content dispute. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:46, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The way the individual is Owning the article appeared to me like a COI editor. There is nothing specific other than the owning and the tone of the article that gave me the feeling this is a COI editor.VViking_TalkEdits 13:14, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I am not a COI editor. Do not accuse me of such thing based on your "feeling". This wikipedia page is as good as others which are talking about other public figures. Ibrahimsabotaleb120

{reply to|Viewmont Viking} For what it's worth, I agree that it looked like a COI editor based on the language of the article. If the editor doesn't have a COI, then that's good. I've done some work on removing the excessive titles. I'll try to take a another pass at the article later this week. —Eyer (If you reply, add {{reply to|Eyer}} to your message to let me know.) 20:28, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Maybe this wasn't the correct venue to bring this up as I had no 'proof' of a COI, however this editor has indicated ownership over the article. Even after being warned here the editor has continued to remove any tags or edits without discussion. In addition to claiming that I am "clearly prejudice." Against them.VViking_TalkEdits 22:40, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

@Eyer: The page as is now is worthless. You or VVking removed all of the pu lic figure's history, contributions, and honors. You converted the page to a page talking about a non-significant person. I would rather delete the page than keeping it that way. When I say I feel the editor has prejudice, I say that with 100% certainty because he/she is totally fine with other wikipedia pages having tons of unsourced information (like a page named osman ahmed osman), but not ok with my page which has sourced information. I know what I am talking about. The references and sources list all of the history and contributions of the public figure that I am talking about. It is not my problem that you did not open the sources. It is also not my problem that you do not understand arabic (some of the sources are in arabic language). I do not have to add a sources after each sentence (is this what you guys want me to do?). This is not how wikipedia works. The sources have all information. I will find ways to further raise this to the attention of wikipedia, because what VVking is doing is harrassment, totally unprofessional.

@Ibrahimsabotaleb120: If you wish to take it further, you will have to engage the other editors on the talkpage first, where they are trying to discuss improving the article. They have laid out what they find problematic about the sourcing. You have 10 references; 5 of them are to the company the subject was CEO of,(not independent) and one is to wikipedia itself.(not reliable) and the section "Leadership and membership of committees and scientific societies" has no references at all. So their concerns about sourcing are well justified. Just because some other articles in Wikipedia aren't very good is no excuse to add more bad ones!

If you could remember sign your posts with 4 tildes ~ which will leave your name and date stamp your posts, it makes it easier for others to see who is typing what. Curdle (talk) 12:28, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

I have sources but in hard copy format. These sources are snippets from Egyptian newspapers from several years ago. They list the honors of the public figure and his political history and accomplishments. These newspapers were not online back then. Only available in hard copies and I have them scanned. Should I upload them in the article? @Eyer: I trust your judgment. Please take a look at the article and tell me what needs to be done. I listed all the online sources that I could get. I can upload the scanned newspaper articles if you want. They are in Arabic. Someone said that one of the sources is the website of the company founded by Ahmed Moharram, and it is not a good source. I understand that. But this is not a normal company. This is the largest consulting firm in Egypt. It is the Republic's consultant, and for sure, any incorrect information would be detected by the government.Ibrahimsabotaleb120 (talk) 19:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

@Ibrahimsabotaleb120: Printed sources can be used, and so can Arabic-language sources, if they are considered reliable. Have a look at {{cite news}} - there are many examples of how to format references to a printed newspaper. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:53, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Carla Bozulich

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

The only activity of this user is adding content at Carla Bozulich. The username clearly indicates a possible conflict of interests. DoebLoggs (talk) 08:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Gab (social network) again

• Gab (social network) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Laurirang (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

A new SPA has appeared Laurirang (talk · contribs) who is intent on insisting that Gab's twitter is a more reliable source than the SPLC. So far they only edit articles related to Gab. They've been asked at user talk whether they have a CoI to declare but have not yet replied. I'm concerned, especially as they've shown willingness to edit-war social media links into the lede over a well regarded WP:RS. Simonm223 (talk) 13:43, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Quantar Solutions

• Factor analysis of information risk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Draft:Quantar Solutions Limited (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Draft:Dr Phillip King-Wilson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Cyberquant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Could be potential autobio, and COI in this related collection of items. IMO, notability is questionable on all of them. One of the articles was discussed at COIN in 2016: Archive 105 ☆ Bri (talk) 16:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

The Stranger (sociology)

• The Stranger (sociology) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Zygmunt Bauman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Shaun Best Sociologist (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User adding references with a links to a book he's author of. --DoebLoggs (talk) 07:50, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Attila Horváth (discus thrower)

• Attila Horváth (discus thrower) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Horváth Attila József (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User adding content to a page apparently connected to it's username. DoebLoggs (talk) 09:36, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Reported to WP:UAA as WP:IMPERSONATE. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:06, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Lululemon Athletica

• Lululemon Athletica (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Liz Dunn CGP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Editor is a principal in CGP, Consumer Growth Partners, in an investment firm in the retail industry, and according to that firm's webpage was involved in the IPO for Lululemon Athletica. She has not disclosed her COI in any way, but has edited articles about this and a number of other firms in this industry which compete with firms her company has a piece of, or which she was involved with herself. Orange Mike | Talk 15:31, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

References

Just noting that User:Liz Dunn CGP edited Orangemike's comment, which I reverted. - MrOllie (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Lululemon, a company whose IPO I worked on 12 years ago at a former employer did not appear to me to be a COI. However I will err on the side of caution the future. I am an expert in the retail industry and so some of my knowledge comes from working with these companies over the last 25 years. I am not editing anything I have a current or recent business interest in or being paid for. Also, I am not a principal at CGP. I was attempting to create an appropriate and accurate COI notice when I edited the post by Orangemike. Apologies for that misstep. I wasn't familiar with the mechanics of adding to a discussion. Liz Dunn CGP (talk) 17:42, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

CGP's website makes you sound like a big deal there (not that there's anything wrong with that). We genuinely do like input from subject matter experts like yourself, Liz; but the horror stories of people in the corporate sector who think they can use us to pimp for their own interests make fascinating reading in a morbid sort of way. Don't let this little speed bump discourage you. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:23, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Pier Paolo Pandolfi

I am looking for assistance with the Wikipedia article Pier Paolo Pandolfi. I have declared I have a conflict of interest and requested changes on the talk page. The previous version of the article was edited by someone in my organization without disclosure which caused a conflict of interest notice to the article. Since then, all of my requests have been to remove anything that does not meet Wikipedia guidelines. Prior to my requests, the article looked like this link. After my requests, an editor implemented some of the edits so it looked like this link. Everything in the current article was reviewed by and implemented by a neutral editor from Wikipedia volunteer community.

I have asked many times to remove the notice at the top of the page but have been met with resistance. I was initially told to reach out to the editor who placed the notice. That editor reached out to another editor who said that it could be removed once there is an agreeable article copy. Then that editor said they were going to edit it. They never edited it so I asked if it was okay to remove and my request was denied as there was not a "consensus" to remove it. If everything in the article was implemented by a neutral editor, why would the notice still need to remain? I read the page that talks about conflict of interest notices and it appears the issue is addressed. Leaving it there seems more like shaming the subject than anything else.

After my final request, an editor removed all of his publications from the page (can be seen here) stating "we don't need these here – a reliable academic database will provide a complete and up-to-date list." I am confused as this seems customary in Wikipedia articles for academic professionals. Just seems like further punishment for a previous editor who did not disclose their connection to the subject.

Can someone please look at the page and tell me what needs to happen for this notice to be removed and if we can add back the publications? I am just confused at this point as I have done everything asked of me and what is stated in Wikipedia rules. --BIHAKen (talk) 03:05, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I apologize that this may appear to be circular. The discussion that you've mentioned was to determine if the template could be removed. The other editors made some statements, but then no changes were made by them. You then asked me to remove the template again, and my response was that there was no consensus to remove them. That was based on my reading of the conversation and the fact that the other two editors did not remove the templates. The template itself calls attention to the fact that edits were made by an editor who did not disclose. As the other editors have not acted, the only way to remove the template now is to remove the undisclosed edits (or remove them, and then have a neutral editor re-add them). At no time have these undisclosed edits been presented to me, by you, to be removed. That would need to occur for the template to be removed. Regards,  Spintendo  10:02, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

At this point this looks like a bare-bones uninflated biographical article which, at first glance, does not appear to need such a warning. I'd suggest we remove it unless there are some specific points in the present text which are problematic. Haukur (talk) 10:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

JLAN has taken care of this. My thanks to them for their help.  Spintendo  13:15, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Manpreet Johal

• Draft:Manpreet Johal (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Draft:Vehli Janta Films (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Draft:Vehli Janta Records (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Parmindersinghbawa (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This appears to be an undisclosed paid editor per their profile on LinkedIn, created Manpreet Johal and companies that Johal founded and repeatedly uploading copyrighted images. GSS (talk|c|em) 11:07, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

Parmindersinghbawa first denied, then disclosed his paid status and constantly moving his incomplete draft to main. GSS (talk|c|em) 16:01, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Matt William Knowles

• Matthew Knowles (actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Matthew Knowles (Actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Matthew Knowles(Actor) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Matt William Knowles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Draft:Matthew Knowles (actor) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Draft:Matthew William Knowles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Draft:Matt William Knowles (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

• Theos1919 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Frayae (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Ashleyalv (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• SravaniChalla (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Lyndasim (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Pamelasmith102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Requiem for a Daydream (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Voleares195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Godwinme (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The continuing promotion of Matt William Knowles.

Articles on this individual have been deleted multiple times. At Matthew Knowles (actor) alone it has been 3 including and afd deletion.

Amongs the accounts creating articles or drafts have been SravaniChalla (blocked sock Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kspellskarthik)), Lyndasim (blocked for Using Wikipedia for spam or advertising purposes), Pamelasmith102 (SPA, no remaing live edits), Requiem for a Daydream (checkuser blocked), Voleares195 (block sock, Kspellskarthik), Godwinme (3 articles created, all deleted).

The latest draft was created by Ashleyalv who is a declared paid editor for this subject. Since October 2018 it has been heavily editted by Theos1919 who is a single purpose account over the 10 months they have been editing this page. The draft is promotional, amongst other things giving a large focus on "Charity Work" sourced to primary/pr. This draft was "approved" by Frayae (blocked sock Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/A Den Jentyl Ettien Avel Dysklyver). duffbeerforme (talk) 12:53, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I created this page as my first (and only) page on wikipedia. I based it off of pages for artists I thought similarly skilled and everything in the article I found reading through news articles about Knowles on google. I had a lot of help on multiple occasions in the help irc channel. I am not connected to Knowles other than my taking interest in him after I saw his film Poppies in a film festival and was surprised he didn’t have a wikipedia. I think I created the page according to the rules of wikipedia. Let me know if you have any other issues. Theos1919 (talk) 16:52, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Duckhorn Vineyards, etc.

• Duckhorn Vineyards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Kosta Browne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Liza Zimmerman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Over more than a hundred small edits during the last few weeks, Liza Zimmerman has been turning Duckhorn Vineyards into an advertisement, with variable subtlety. They disclosed on their userpage that they are paid "by the Duckhorn Winery to correct and amend the winery's content on its Wikipedia page". More recently, they submitted a short draft, now Kosta Browne, on a related topic with AFC and greatly expanded it once it was accepted. User:Railfan23 asked them on their talk page to properly disclose their paid editing in accordance with WP:COI but got no reply. This edit seems to be the only place they have acknowledged being paid for edits to that page. They have also started three other closely related drafts, [17], [18], and [19], with no explicit mention of whether they were paid for those. KSFT ^(t|c) 19:50, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

The edits include some that are openly promotional and some that are even counterfactual. Both of those examples are after extensive discussions explaining the problem of promotional edits. Having Liza Zimmerman around and editing topics on which she has a conflict of interest means that she requires constant supervision, and the articles constant cleanup. I do not think that's beneficial to the project. And that's not even considering the lackluster disclosure. Huon (talk) 19:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Coupa (again)

• Coupa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Mdw23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello! I recently noticed some suspicious edits to Coupa. This editor had made some deleted drafts that I can't see, but all of their remaining edits seem to be to Coupa. This article was earlier brought up in this thread where a disclosed paid editor was trying to get some advice here, however the editor who made that thread seems to no longer edit that article. TheAwesomeHwyh 20:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Actually, it looks like the draft they kept trying to make was about Coupa's CEO. TheAwesomeHwyh 21:00, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi! Confirming Coupa hasn't been a client of mine or my employer for more than three years. In early 2016 when I was working with Coupa, I gave my contacts there an overview of Wikipedia guidelines and COI policies, but it's quite possible there's been a lot of institutional turnover since then. I can't speak to any recent edits. Mary Gaulke (talk) 02:39, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Authentic Brands Group

• Authentic Brands Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

IP editor 8.140.180.34 (talk · contribs) made broad claims on edits to Authentic Brands Group that are not supported by sources. User Major Matt Mason85 (talk · contribs) has also edited article, and issued a notice on my talk page against the removal of information added by IP editor, with specific use of the word "we" (implying direct association and COI with company). ViperSnake151  Talk  22:49, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Keith Pickard

• Keith Pickard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• SenatorKeithPickard (talk · contribs)
• Special:Diff/909365828
• subsequent edits

Uncle G (talk) 09:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Felix Velarde

• Felix Velarde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Jhoward734 (talk · contribs)

This user has been trying to update the article with promotional material. It seems to be the same sentence all the time that they are trying to enter. They have stated that they are not being paid, but several attempts to add the same content bely that statement. I think at the very least the editor has a coi. The sentence he/she want to add is Velarde specialises in implementing frameworks to drive scaleup companies to double or triple their revenue. They're adding other content which is generally ok, well referenced and could go back in, but some stuff and sections was unsourced and their was an attempt to link Velarde to a famous architect without providing evidence. scope_creep^Talk 11:55, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

• That wording seems to be a red flag. I can only find it being said, over and over, by the article subject, in autobiographies such as on the subject's own WWW site and in interviews. As far as I can tell, no-one else makes these claims. I am concerned by the account talking of xyrself in the first person plural, too.

  In fact, is this subject even notable? All of the sources in the article for the past 12 years are either advertising (such as a 2016 advertisement for a forthcoming conference, including how to buy a ticket, being used to support a statement that it cannot possibly support, since the advertisement was published before the claimed event actually happened) or autobiography, sometimes interviews and more often with the subject xyrself in the byline. Do independent sources other than advertisements and autobiographies even exist?

  Uncle G (talk) 13:40, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

  • Tagged article accordingly - David Gerard (talk) 14:00, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

The subject is notable. It went to Afd, and a BBC produced video surfaced of him from YouTube, detailing him and his web design agency in 1994. It was clear keep. It was one of the earliest web companies. I went through several copy-edits, it was huge article before and that was what was consensus was agreed. It was spam target that went on and on for months, until there was several blocks and then it was quiet for more than a year, now it back on for some reason. scope_creep^Talk 01:22, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• I'm the subject, not sure if I am allowed to comment. I have never paid anyone to do anything here. Some updates were done a few years ago by an ex-colleague after we stopped working together and (I thought) had lost contact. I'd rather you took down the page than had anything up that suggests in any way I'm unethical, thanks.

Douglas Vakoch

• Douglas Vakoch (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• CarmenRodriguez91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This is perhaps a case of COI, or something closely related to it - it has been raised unanswered on editor's talk page previously. This editor has also created the METI (associated organisation) article. Whatever the underlying issue is, this BLP is 150,000 bytes long. If I was to prune this article, the entire filmography/radiography(!) etc would go. If we listed every radio appearance by every academic on here.....suffice to say it's more CV/fancruft than encyclopaedic. It is well referenced, and therefore it's difficult for me to tell just what content is notable and what isn't. Editor seems to have a fixation on the subject - other snippets of activity support the argument of COI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Green_Psychotherapy,_PC) Also to note is activity on related articles regarding subject - quite pervasive, best seen https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/CarmenRodriguez91&dir=prev&limit=500&target=CarmenRodriguez91 with example diffs here, here too, three, four. There are multiple examples - over ten - of generously positive Douglas Vakoch content added to related articles by this editor. Rayman60 (talk) 17:01, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

I took a shot at trimming the article down substantially. There's probably more to be done. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 19:42, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Emil Alzamora

• Draft:Emil Alzamora (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Albemarle Gallery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Iain Faulkner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• DomenicPontone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

DominicPontone's username seems to indicate a clear conflict of interest with the subjects of these articles. Draft:Emil Alzamora (originally created in mainspace as an article; draftified by DGG as undersourced, since CSDed for COPYVIO) was created entirely with content copied from the Pontone Gallery's website, and in this series of diffs, they appear to be writing about themselves and their gallery. They were warned about COI issues on their userpage by Alexf regarding the edits to Albermarle Gallery (which is connected to the Pontone Gallery), but they have made no steps towards the necessary COI declarations, and have since created articles about Emil Alzamora and Iain Faulkner, both artists who exhibit at the Albermarle Gallery, which were both largely COPYVIO, and about which the user has a clear conflict of interest. I am concerned that they are here largely to promote their gallery and the artists who exhibit there - they made a few useful contributions after creating their account, presumably to get autoconfirmed, and then started writing articles in mainspace about subjects they have a commercial connection with, despite being notified of our COI policies. GirthSummit _(blether) 22:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

TalentSprint‎

• TalentSprint‎ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Gaddam vinay kumar gupta (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Article is recent recipient of large edit from SPA that inserted much content matching WP:Identifying PR, including list of products, funding history, partnerships, list of officers, list of awards. Having done a bunch of cleanup on these issues before, I'd appreciate another pair of eyes on this one. ☆ Bri (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

User:Sameerbhosle9/sandbox

• Shweta Rohira (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• User:Sameerbhosle9/sandbox (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Sameerbhosle9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Sameerbhosle9 was requested by Robert McClenon on July 8th to read COI and PAID and make the appropriate disclosures about paid editing. This was requested at User:Sameerbhosle9/sandbox which Samerbhosle9 had subitted to AfC for review. No disclosure was made and the draft was resubmitted on July 13th and then declined by me on the 24th. Sameerbhosle then leaves a message on my talk page stating "I need to know, why my client's page was rejected." This indicates undisclosed paid editing and despite being told to make the declaration, user has failed to do so. Would recommend a review of their edits and a block based on WP:NOTHERE. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

• Noting Shweta Rohira was repeatedly recreated, and is currently salted. ☆ Bri (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Pending at WP:MFD. I recommend a review of all of the recently created articles by this editor to see whether COI appears probable. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:28, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

I was going to do an overall cleanup but I was pretty hot when I read "my client's page" so through best to back away and let others handle. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:19, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Despite not addressing the COI issue raised on their talk page and here, editor has returned to remove a prod notice from Shobhana Desai.--CNMall41 (talk) 19:03, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Rashmi Ranjan Parida

• Rashmi Ranjan Parida (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Rashmirparida (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has created a likely autobio and his other edits seem to have some COI. I would also say that he is borderline notable, I would lean towards, non-notable. Daiyusha (talk) 04:29, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

Mandy Barnett

2601:482:457F:C66B:C4F0:2399:FD97:CB2A (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and Cmzbnash (talk · contribs) are constantly adding Mandy Barnett in the "associated acts" column of various artists who have no clear connection to Barnett whatsoever. I suspect that this is COI. Most of the edits to Mandy Barnett proper seem to be in good faith, but the spamming of "associated acts" suggests otherwise. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:59, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

• Mandy Barnett played Patsy Cline in Always Patsy Cline, there is a huge association between the two. Alison Krauss has recorded with Mandy Barnett as well, and she regularly performs with BJ Thomas. That is why they were added. To be honest, I thought I added it incorrectly previously and that's why it wasnt there, definitely not spamming. Also not sure why links to her official pages were removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cmzbnash (talk • contribs)

• @Cmzbnash: One-time collaborations are not what the "associated_acts" field is used for. It should be for groups of which the individual artist is a member, or frequent collaborators. Barnett never worked with Cline proper, so neither is an associated act of the other. For instance, "Union Station" is an acceptable "associated act" of Alison Krauss since she is a member of that band. Sammy Kershaw is a valid associated act for Lorrie Morgan since the two recorded multiple collaborations. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 19:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)

TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) ah, I see, thank you for clarifying that! One thing however, Patsy Cline has been listed as an associated act on her wiki page for years, before I ever edited anything. Look at the artist's listed as associated acts on Patsy's page, most of them werent even alive when Patsy was around. Why are they (Leeann Rimes, Pam Tillis) allowed to be associated with her but Mandy isnt? Im not being snarky, I genuinely dont understand!

Harcourt Butler Technical University

• Harcourt Butler Technical University (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• 2405:204:A084:DCA2:CC93:95EF:DF38:4076 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This IP has been adding several edits of unsourced information that is purely original research. It is likely that the IP is associated with the school. AmericanAir88^(talk) 20:04, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

• It's not original research. It's a straight copy and paste of this promotional brochure, which is of course not free content. There are people in the world who use wholesale plagiarism of other people's writing as a substitute for not themselves being able to write. Uncle G (talk) 09:31, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

EFounders

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

Requesting more eyes on this. Apparent UPE by recent editor(s), off-wiki stuff I don't want to get into here. It has been discussed here before – see Archive 88. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:58, 8 August 2019 (UTC)