Jump to content

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Conflict of interest

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Artbranch (talk | contribs) at 21:24, 29 December 2023 (→‎Zheng Chongbin (artist): Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"WP:COIN" redirects here. For the WikiProject on articles about coins, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics.
    Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
    Shortcuts
    Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

    Click here to purge this page
    (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-wp@wikipedia.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:A&P
    Talk:Advanced Research and Invention Agency
    Talk:James F. Allen (businessman)
    Talk:American Water Works
    Talk:Timothy Archambault
    Talk:Bank of Greene County
    Talk:Bell Bank
    Talk:William Bolcom
    Talk:Doug Bremner
    Talk:Mike Cannon-Brookes
    Talk:Capital One
    Talk:Martin Casado
    Talk:Cboe Global Markets
    Talk:Sonia Chang-Díaz
    Talk:Character.ai
    Talk:Cheyne Capital Management
    Talk:Chicago Board Options Exchange
    Talk:Chime (company)
    Talk:City of Whittlesea
    Talk:Cohen Milstein
    Talk:Comcast
    Talk:Dahua Technology
    Talk:Dark Castle Entertainment
    Talk:Edmund de Waal
    Talk:Paul Devlin (filmmaker)
    Talk:Discovery Land Company
    Talk:Michael Douglas
    Talk:Edelman (firm)
    Talk:End-user license agreement
    Talk:Engine No. 1
    Talk:ESAB
    Talk:Scott Farquhar
    Talk:Fastly
    Talk:Florida Power & Light
    Talk:Bryan Fogel
    Talk:John Freund (business executive)
    Talk:Bradley Fried
    Talk:Steven Furtick
    Talk:GetYourGuide
    Talk:GLX Digital
    Talk:Colin Goldberg
    Talk:Grail (company)
    Talk:Graph database
    Talk:Green Line (TRAX)
    Talk:Evan G. Greenberg
    Talk:Gulliver Preparatory School
    Talk:Shashi Gupta
    Talk:H.B. Fuller
    Talk:Richard Harland
    Talk:Eric Hippeau
    Talk:History of the Jews in Charleston, South Carolina
    Talk:HOK (firm)
    Talk:Hong Kong Free Press
    Talk:Index Ventures
    Talk:Industrious
    Talk:Institutional Venture Partners
    Talk:International Churches of Christ
    Talk:Barry Irwin
    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:Karl Lagerfeld
    Talk:Alison Lawton
    Talk:Dion Lee
    Talk:Kewsong Lee
    Talk:Jeffrey Leiden
    Talk:Lemelson Foundation
    Talk:Liberty Towers
    Talk:Library of Congress Subject Headings
    Talk:Robert Luciano
    Talk:Marbella Apartments
    Talk:Anthony Marinelli
    Talk:Mascot Books
    Talk:Masdar
    Talk:Monero
    Talk:MP Materials
    Talk:Neuroscience Research Australia
    Talk:NextEra Energy
    Talk:Obama Foundation
    Talk:Omaha Steaks
    Talk:Operating system
    Talk:Orphan Train
    Talk:Orphanage
    Talk:OUTtv (Canadian TV channel)
    Talk:Lubos Pastor
    Talk:Dana G. Peleg
    Talk:Pershing Square Capital Management
    Talk:Matthew Pittinsky
    Talk:Plinabulin
    Talk:Programming language
    Talk:PureTalk
    Talk:Qiagen
    Talk:QIAGEN
    Talk:Quantitative storytelling
    Talk:Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership
    Talk:Marc Rowan
    Talk:Elizabeth Rowe (flutist)
    Talk:Roland Rudd
    Talk:Jay Ruderman
    Talk:Rainer K. Sachs
    Talk:Security AppScan
    Talk:Simprints
    Talk:Site Number 4 Mnt 85
    Talk:Software license
    Talk:Dragan Šolak (businessman)
    Talk:SoundExchange
    Talk:Subway (restaurant)
    Talk:Sysco
    Talk:Joseph Tabrikian
    Talk:Tenants and Owners Development Corporation
    Talk:Tencent
    Talk:The Culinary Institute of America
    Talk:Theatre Development Fund
    Talk:Titmouse, Inc.
    Talk:Tricentis
    Talk:Jean-Pascal Tricoire
    Talk:Bradley Tusk
    Talk:United Launch Alliance
    Talk:United States Postal Service
    Talk:Veris Residential
    Talk:Versapay
    Talk:Dan Wagner
    Talk:Joey Wat
    Talk:Wearable cardioverter defibrillator
    Talk:Maya Wiley
    Talk:Sam Yagan
    Talk:Zearn
    Talk:Zero-day vulnerability
    Talk:Alice Zorn

    Swiss Mister in NY

    In a recent BLPN discussion Swiss Mister in NY seems to be denying they have a COI with Emmanuel Lemelson albeit without explicitly saying it. They have weirdly accused those established editors opposing their changes of having a COI [1] Emmanuel Lemelson seems to have a long history of COI editing take a look at the template at Talk:Emmanuel Lemelson. What I found interesting is this account is actually fairly old although with very limited edit history especially before 2023. When I explored that edit history it got even more interesting.

    Swiss Mister's first major (undeleted?) contribution seems to have been creating Intelitek [2] back in 2011. They returned to that article this year for some updates [3]. This was about a year after Special:Contributions/Grahamceline had made a hash of trying to update it. Per the discussion at User talk:Grahamceline, it seems Grahamceline had a COI regarding Intelitek.

    Then in 2013 they added mentions of Distil Networks to 2 different articles [4] [5]. Distil Networks was deleted quite a few years later in 2018 and per the AFD, had been created by WMF banned (Meta:Special:CentralAuth/Gogo Rulez) Special:Contributions/Gogo Rulez. Putting the WMF ban aside, about 2 years later an editor open with their COI User talk:Tonybdistil was involved so we know there was some COI relating to Distil Networks. Gogo Rulez themselves added Distil Networks to the Content protection network article [6] and about a month later at the time they were adding the mentions to the article article, Swiss Mister in NY removed the orphan tag from CPN [7] [8]. CPN itself was created by Special:Contributions/Prelude after noon back in 2012 [9]. But given the long time between creation and the interesting addition of Distil Networks, I'm not sure what to make of that even considering this interesting comment from Prelude [10]. (Distil Networks has been bought by Imperva so I suspect any COI risk has changed.)

    A few months later still in 2013, Swiss Mister reappeared and one of the things they did was write in support of keeping some images labelled unfree [11] for Michael Dweck. As remarked in the discussion Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 December 15 the changing of the Flickr account to say it clearly belonged to Michael Dweck made it seem possible it was being done in response to the discussion. And interesting enough Special:Contributions/Avian appreciator who uploaded the images, seems a long term SPA regarding Michael Dweck. Note also this wasn't Swiss Mister's first interest in Dweck. nearly 3 years previously back in 2011, they had tried to add a NFCC image [12] [13] [14].

    I'm not an admin so cannot see anything deleted like the history of Distil Networks. Also to be clear, I'm not accusing Swiss Mister of being a sock of the other editors. In fact for most of them I think it seems more likely they are not a sock.

    Nil Einne (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    A quick scan through the 85 deleted edits on Distil Networks didn't show up anything particularly interesting. —Smalljim  11:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have notified everyone I mentioned in my comment except for Gogo Rulez as I don't see a purpose in notifying a globally locked editor banned by the WMF. Nil Einne (talk) 04:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Comment: Seems like an awful lot of investigative work for someone to undertake because an accusation that two editors have been circling a biography and reverting other editors and even an admin for well on half a dozen years or more was found to be "weird." And only to conclude that I'm probably not a sockpuppet at work! Hey, thanks! Regardless, I hope that someone will let me know specifically which of my hundreds of edits has weakened Wikipedia in some material way? Until then, I'll continue editing in the ways that I have been, but probably avoiding articles where vested editors have assumed an ownership role. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 14:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    That seems like awfully long way go saying that the accusation of COI is spot on. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Is that the new standard for COI investigations? I mean, who actually loses their password to Wikipedia? That seems very suspicious to me. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 16:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The standard for COI investigations is "Is there a COI?" what isn't part of the COI standards is "weakened Wikipedia in some material way" because COI editing weakens wikipedia no matter the quality of the edits. You appear to be acknowledging that you do in fact have a COI, you just don't to say as much explicitly but you also don't want to deny it because you appear honest. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    While I don't feel required to even say this, I assure you I'm not being paid by any company to edit any page anywhere on Wikipedia. I am not Mr. Lemelson, nor am I a member of his family, nor do I live near him. I don't know what more you need me to say, but I have a feeling it will never be enough. Like I said, this all seems like an unusually vigorous defense of two editors who have taken personal control of a biography for the better part of a decade. I'm happy to edit elsewhere, and if I should ever get up the courage to concern myself with that biography again, I'll seek permission from the ruling editorial pair on the Talk page. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 02:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    A few days ago I set out the history of COI editing on Emmanuel Lemelson at WP:BLP/N#Emmanuel_Lemelson (diff), under a section started by the editor in question. Having followed the Lemelson article and engaged with the COI editor(s) for many years, it's clear to me that the current editor is a continuation of the same. The duck test is very persuasive. I'm far too involved to take any admin actions though.  —Smalljim  11:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Pau Pérez-Sales

    This user's edits all relate to Pau Pérez-Sales or to linked topics (Liberation psychology and Torture (journal)). Some of the text they have added to the Pérez-Sales article reads promotional: With more than 20 years of professional experience, Pau Pérez-Sales played a key role - this statement is sourced to a book by Pérez-Sales. The editor has uploaded an image of Pérez-Sales which is marked as "own work", and has twice added the website of Pérez-Sales as an external link to Torture (journal). The editor has been asked twice on their Talk page if they have a conflict of interest, but has not responded and has continued to edit the article. Tacyarg (talk) 20:47, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    COIN concerns on Jim Mellon and elsewhere

    User:U78u87 has been making a number of edits on Jim Mellon and elsewhere that seem clearly promotional in nature in ways that make WP:DUCK hard to avoid. See my comments on their talk page and their response. Many of their edits there and elsewhere (eg. [15][16][17]) seem weirdly focused on "philanthropy" by CEOs and / or removing criticism of them. This doesn't mean that all the removals are inappropriate, of course (these are articles that have had little attention previously) but the sum total of their edits seems hard to credit as normal editing; the particular edit that pushed me over the edge is their most recent one on that page - I can buy that some editors are deeply concerned with being as cautious as possible about BLP-sensitive statements about CEOs, certainly; I can even buy that that same editor also wants to make sure everyone knows about their philanthropy, though as my comment implies it made me a bit suspicious. I can't accept that they are also deeply concerned with wording the details of IPOs and and acquisitions by related companies in clearly promotional terms. And the bulk of their other edits focus on CEOs, popular musicians, and related articles in a similar way - all people who could reasonably employ a person or agency to burnish their Wikipedia articles and which therefore raise concerns about paid editing. They're also, as an aside, a new account who seems intimately familiar with invoking WP:BLP. --Aquillion (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    • Update: Editor has been blocked as a sockpuppet. --Aquillion (talk) 01:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Revanth Reddy

    Article being heavily edited by user with name similar to subject. Also heavy edits from an IP over the last couple days. User was provided a COI notice on their talk page but has not responded. Just requesting eyes for anyone more familiar with the topic. CNMall41 (talk) 22:51, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I also just notified user of this thread. My oversight for not doing it when originally filed. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Better Than Cash Alliance

    This article has had a significant portion of it written by what appear to be COI editors. Thriley (talk) 06:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    The first editor seems to have a direct link to Better Than Cash Alliance in what is a highly promotional UPE article that subverts Wikipedia controls. scope_creepTalk 10:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    WP:SELFCITE at Euler polynomial

    More eyes, please. Interest of the WP:SPAs has been adding content sourced to articles by Hurtado Benavides and Miguel Ángel. In Euler polynomial, this especially appears WP:UNDUE. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Gilles Epié

    The editor has acknowledged a personal relationship with the article subject and does not seem to understand how this presents a conflict of interest. They continue to make edits despite more than one warning. BlueWhale89 (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    AlanMichaelSheppard

    This user page, the only edition in Wikipeda, seems to be self-promotional from websites like https://www.alansheppard.com/ and https://www.alansheppard.com/about. May an administrator have a look and decide if the page is or isn't proper. Pierre cb (talk) 00:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Wrathofyazdan socks

    AngelOnTheRocks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is involved in undisclosed paid editing. Harry A. Hyman was created after they were hired on this freelancer job. ‎Jun Li (chemist) was create after a gap of 3 weeks, so this is a spam-only account and as such should be blocked. Any one who can help discover the original WP:SPI? In any case, this is not a new account. 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 11:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Just wanted to note that both are eligible for draftification per WP:ATD-I. Both articles are not older than 90 days (Harry A. Hyman was created on 29 September 2023 and Jun Li was created on 18 October 2023). 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 11:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I found another GhazaleAryan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Sarvnaz Alambeigi was created based on this job (listed on page3). So Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wrathofyazdan is the correct SPI. 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Elliott Sharp

    Fenderjoe edits nearly exclusively on Elliot Sharp and articles peripheral to him for many years such as adding his name into record label pages. COI notice left on talk page, but returned to editing the same page with no explanation. Tamberrrr removed maintenance templates without explanation and appears to be a sleeper associated with the article subject. Graywalls (talk) 15:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Draft:Torres Castle (Al Hoceima)


    Apparent UPE: Ali Maalouf makes 8 pointless wikify edits, writes the draft and submits it for review within ten minutes. Ali Maalouf then contacts several experienced editors for review. Four and a half hours later new editor Trabeltomed moves the draft into mainspace. Trabeltomed's prior edits were all made today: 11 wikify edits to game the system. While there is surely puppetting of some type, I'm concerned about promoting a tourist destination probably for pay. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    There is no advertisement or anything like that. It is a cultural architecture that you can search for through Google. As for (Trabeltomed), I do not know the reason he moved the draft and I did not contact him. I contacted some officials to review the article. I will only leave you some sources. You decide to decide.
    https://ar.hibapress.com/details-415938.html
    https://achamal24.ma/archives/24247
    https://dalil-rif.com/permalink/30177.html Ali Maalouf (talk) 22:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Both of these accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. Liz Read! Talk! 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Just curious, but what is the evidence? Miracusaurs (talk) 03:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    I found a page on the website of a paid editing agency, which lists the following articles as created by them:

    The pages should be checked for policy violations. It should also be checked whether authors have declared being paid. Janhrach (talk) 16:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Vishen Lakhiani: Created by Taniasafuan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a single purpose account, unsuccessfully nominated for AfD, suspected sock: Princesstowarrior (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Janhrach (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    They are already a known and globally banned entity, see Wikipedia:List_of_paid_editing_companies#Wikibusiness. It's not unusual for such agencies to list articles they did not actually have a hand in creating, none-the-less it is a good idea to check them. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I will check them one-by-one. Even if they aren't created by Wikibusines, the circumstances of the creation of this one are very suspicious. I have nominated it for deletion. Janhrach (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Andreas Umland: created by Stonepillar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), large edits by Миша историк (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Inkitrinky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), COI edits by Andreumland (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This article is ambiguous, I am leaving this to other editors. Janhrach (talk) 20:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I Sent Qonto (neobank) and Adjarabet to Afd. scope_creepTalk 13:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Qonto (neobank) was created by Pcheetpcheet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a single-purpose account, clearly gamed the system to get the article out of userspace. Janhrach (talk) 20:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The user has edits to other Wikimedia wikis, I will review this later. Janhrach (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have notified other wikis of this user. Janhrach (talk) 15:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Adjarabet was created by Hubble (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – a single-purpose account, gaming the system. Notable edits by Lemonisto (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Janhrach (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The latter is unlikely to be paid. The former has edits to Wikidata and kawiki (over 2000!). kawiki should be notified of this. Janhrach (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    kawiki notified of Hubble. Wikidata edits look good-faith, though most are related to interwiki links to kawiki or labels in Georgian, so I am not sure. Janhrach (talk) 09:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Kobi Sitt

    As much as I'd like to assume good faith, something doesn't look quite right with an account registered in 2008 having zero edits until coming in nearly six years later and make 21 edits with skills suggesting its not their first time editing. This account is possibly part of a farm. While I know SPI is the right place if I have the slightest idea of associated accounts, I am not sure. Graywalls (talk) 10:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Zheng Chongbin (artist)

    This article is being originated by an editor with 37 edits. When the article has been nominated for deletion, the editor asks: Please just let me know what exactly I need to do to get this article published. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

    Thank you for your question. I can confirm that I am an independent researcher and do not represent the artist. I am new to writing on Wikipedia and this was the first and only time I tried to write an article here. I am willing to take feedback on board, that is why it is important for me to understand what exactly needs to be improved about the article as I believe that the general guidelines are already addressed in the article. For more details, please see my answer on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zheng Chongbin (Artist). Many thanks. Artbranch (talk) 21:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard&oldid=1192526116"