Jump to content

Talk:World News Media

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Scottrouse (talk | contribs) at 13:47, 22 August 2017 (→‎PROD). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconCompanies Stub‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StubThis article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

PROD

Scottrouse I invite you to explain your concerns in more detail here, and would ask you if you represent or work for this business. Please note that information that may be negative(which I'm not sure how it even is in this case) isn't grounds to delete an article. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Have removed the PROD, as the editor has a highly probable COI, which I have raised on their talkpage. Edwardx (talk) 11:05, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. My concern is that the article in question does not lend anything particularly useful as an encyclopedia entry. Edwardx appears only to have attempted to discredit World News Media and its associated awards by including it in a Vanity awards category and linking to a negative opinion piece in which the one example given is World News Media. Perhaps if we are going to have a discussion, Edwardx would like to disclose what his COI is? If you are being paid for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship as per the wikipedia conflict of interest page. While I would like to assume good faith, I don't think the article in question maintains a neutral tone and remain suspicious of the editor's motives. Scottrouse (talk) 12:13, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Scottrouse Someone posting information critical of this company doesn't mean they have a COI against the company or that they are being paid to edit negatively about this company. However, someone claiming that content is "defamatory" (beware of using legal jargon, see WP:LIBEL) likely has some sort of connection to the company, as people typically don't use that term for things they are not associated with. As stated on your user talk page, you also need to state any COI or paid editing relationship that you have. Regarding the tone of this article, if you have reliable sources that have information that might improve the tone, please offer them. 331dot (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have no conflict of interest, and have never been paid to edit Wikipedia (as has been stated on my userpage for quite some time). I have started articles on other "vanity award" companies, and have no particular view on WN Media. Amusing that Scottrouse is suddenly such an authority on conflict of interest, when they are yet to make a COI declaration. Edwardx (talk) 12:41, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I merely suggested that Edwardx might have a COI given the tone of the entry and invited them to disclose what relationship, if any, they have with World News Media or its past employees. I do not claim to be an authority on COI and confess that I am a current employee at World News Media. I am not a regular wikipedia user - we do not maintain any wikipedia pages so you can attribute any missteps in the process to this (and I do apologise for this). I am concerned that the article in question does not preserve a neutral point of view and contains statements from sources that are false. 331dot, you request reliable sources which wikipedia defines as: "published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" - those are in short supply these days, you need only look as far as this wikipedia entry for proof. The company would prefer not to have a wikipedia entry, I'm not allowed to remove it, and by virtue of the fact that I am an employee, I'm not allowed to directly edit the page. So what would you have me do? Scottrouse (talk) 13:47, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]