Jump to content

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2021 March 19/Data

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Data
[edit]

In the section editors can provide data relevant to the discussion. I offer what I've done here in the hopes that it may be useful. My thoughts are that the editor would aim to provide the data in an unbiased way yet at the same time signatures can be provided (I put them here at the top of each section) so that it's possible to see who worked on finding that particular data at that particular point in time. Maybe even if this data is not definitive in any way it could stimulate further more sophisticated investigation that could help to lead to consensus. My thoughts are that if there are any comments on the data gathered that could be in a separate subsection, say "Discussion" or "Comments". People could link to this data in the course of the discussion above. Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Using the Massviews Tool to get a list of all articles in a category sorted by viewcount
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Massviews can be used to get a list of all articles in a category sorted by viewcount (I don't know what exactly is being done server side and client side, but want to note that for Category:Wikipedia articles with possible conflicts of interest with 14,898 pages it took a few minutes on my machine when I did it again though it was able to go from a cached version).

Presence and state of discussion for the top 10 viewed articles in Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's here is a list of the top ten articles by view count in Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content. I went through and looked for discussion on undisclosed paid editing.

Top Ten Most Viewed Articles in Category:Wikipedia articles with undisclosed paid content
Number Article Views Per Day Discussion on UPE Month Tagged
1 F5 Networks 47,272 / day No October 2020
2 Jamie Kern Lima 2,831 / day No April 2020
3 Betika 2,464 / day No September 2018
4 Tony Buzbee 2,335 / day No June 2020
5 Grammarly 1,592 / day Yes, there’s been continued discussion of conflict of interest over the years. Hipal also known as Ronz has corresponded with NCdave along with people specifically identified as being with Grammarly such as Nik.grammarly and Michael.Grammarly. May 2020
6 Kimora Lee Simmons 1,547 / day No Feburary 2020
7 Special Activities Center 1,394 / day Yes, this one was recently tagged by MarioGom (not pinged). March 2021
8 Uber Eats 1,167 / day Yes, though the discussions look to be for a previous taggings of the article (in 2016 and 2018). The article then got tagged again as part of the articles tagged in the VentureKit sockpuppet investigation. December 2020
9 Arianna Huffington 1,105 / day No November 2020
10 Dara Huang 1,085 / day No January 2020

I don’t know why F5 Networks is getting so many pageviews. Seems to spike on weekdays and then decrease substantially on weekends and holidays. (see Pageviews tool on F5 Networks).

I think it possible that more recent taggings have had more discussion added as I noticed this for these associated with Mathematica and Stephen Wolfram.

Data on tag removal using Wayback Machine
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I did is to use the Wayback Machine capture of Category:articles with undisclosed paid content from September 2017 (captured 2019-04-11), and compared it to the current Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content_from_September_2017, and then went through five articles that are on the earlier list but not on the current one, and sought to see how things went in terms of tag removal for that article.

One could also consider: Wayback Machine capture of Category:Wikipedia_articles_with_undisclosed_paid_content (captured 2017-10-09). One could note that the listing at that time was 217 articles tagged in September 2017, and yet today for September 2017 that number is down to only 94.

Comment: Maybe the tags should be added back to ATyr Pharma and Teo A. Babun. I have not done so, but if somebody does do that perhaps that could noted in a Comments section as talked about above.

  1. Matty Amendola: this one got deleted multiple times.
  2. ATyr Pharma: tag removed by user which is likley a SPA based on contributions and username.(diff)
  3. Teo A. Babun: tag removed by user which is likely a SPA based on contributions and username. (diff)
  4. Chamberlain Group: tag removed by editor Pmsyyz with edit summary, "looks good". (diff)
  5. EC Harris: tag removed by editor Dormskirk with edit summary, "Tag removed - the edits seem to have been made with the approval of an independent editor". (diff)

Data on tag removal from the VentureKit investigation
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This list was included at Template talk:Undisclosed paid, and can be updated here (note that some of the times listed were taken based on my timezone setting).

87 articles were included in the list based on those that got tagged in early December 2020 as part of the VentureKit investigation.

This script can be used to check for which ones have changed, and as of this writing in March 2021 there are 74 articles that are still tagged where 13 have had the tag removed.

Of these 13 my assessment is that for these 7 editing (or reversion) was done as part of the removal (or after the removal)

For these 2 although no specific editing was done by the remover the edit summary indicates that a review was done.

For these 4 the tagger removed the tag, but there isn't any indication of clean up editing or a review.

Click show to see table of UPE tagged articles from list.
Subset of Articles Tagged with Undisclosed Paid Editing as Result of Sockpuppet Investigation
# Article Avg. Views Per Day UPE Tagged Tag Added Tag Removed Editor who Removed Edit Summary on Removal
1 J.Crew 271 Yes 21:58, 9 December 2020
2 Mike Coupe 47 Yes 11:50, 7 December 2020
3 Alan Joyce (executive) 115 No 11:48, 7 December 2020 13:34, 11 January 2021 Sampajanna Sockpuppet account blocked in December 2020 …
4 WhatsApp 24225 No 11:44, 7 December 2020 00:17, 25 December 2020 TonyBallioni This is 1) clearly one of the most notable softwares in the world and 2) no neutrality or advertising issues have been noted on the talk page; removing as this does not help the reader
5 Walton Group 237 Yes 11:33, 7 December 2020
6 Advent International 257 Yes 11:29, 7 December 2020
7 Frank McCabe (businessman) 1 Yes 11:20, 7 December 2020
8 Newbridge Silverware 5 Yes 11:14, 7 December 2020
9 Self Help Africa 6 Yes 11:13, 7 December 2020
10 Tyrone Yates 7 Yes 11:06, 7 December 2020
11 Goldman Sachs 2957 No 08:34, 7 December 2020 10:19, 27 December 2020 Blablubbs rm UDP, checked and fine
12 Leonard Green & Partners 113 Yes 07:35, 7 December 2020
13 Bob Chapek 1084 No 07:22, 7 December 2020 21:59, 4 February 2021 KamranMackey Result was Inconclusive; so remove template
14 Craig Miller (CEO) 2 Yes 07:20, 7 December 2020
15 Ken Whyte 4 Yes 07:17, 7 December 2020
16 Lochlann Quinn 13 No 07:14, 7 December 2020 14:52, 19 December 2020 MER-C revert UPE sockpuppet
17 Eric Fingerhut 29 Yes 07:11, 7 December 2020
18 Greg Murphy (politician) 254 Yes 07:09, 7 December 2020
19 Rico Oller 2 Yes 07:06, 7 December 2020
20 Rockefeller Foundation 410 Yes 07:00, 7 December 2020
21 Strive Masiyiwa 266 Yes 06:56, 7 December 2020
22 Carrie Hessler-Radelet 32 Yes 06:55, 7 December 2020
23 Maria Elvira Salazar 961 No 06:54, 7 December 2020 02:35, 8 February 2021 LuisZ9 based on what?
24 Wendy Greuel 35 Yes 06:49, 7 December 2020
25 Steve Blank 126 Yes 23:08, 6 December 2020
26 August Capital 12 Yes 23:06, 6 December 2020
27 Julie Smolyansky 9 Yes 23:05, 6 December 2020
28 Lisa Falzone 4 Yes 23:05, 6 December 2020
29 Goldbelly 113 Yes 23:04, 6 December 2020
30 Efrat Peled 3 Yes 23:04, 6 December 2020
31 Nordstrom 480 Yes 23:03, 6 December 2020
32 BHLDN 26 Yes 23:02, 6 December 2020
33 TechStyle Fashion Group 84 Yes 23:01, 6 December 2020
34 T. Rowe Price 349 Yes 23:00, 6 December 2020
35 Adam Hootnick 1 Yes 22:58, 6 December 2020
36 Adore Me 108 No 22:57, 6 December 2020 15:01, 22 January 2021 Yaxı Hökmdarz removing the unenclosed paid tag having cleaned up lots of promotional content. See talk page as well
37 Jonathan Lavine 148 Yes 22:54, 6 December 2020
38 Winder Farms 8 Yes 22:52, 6 December 2020
39 Watsi 8 Yes 22:41, 6 December 2020
40 Hasura 34 Yes 22:40, 6 December 2020
41 Affirm (company) 1348 Yes 22:36, 6 December 2020
42 Patagonia, Inc. 570 Yes 22:35, 6 December 2020
43 Travis Kalanick 858 Yes 22:34, 6 December 2020
44 Doximity 57 Yes 22:33, 6 December 2020
45 Gerard Adams 16 Yes 22:33, 6 December 2020
46 Monzo 467 No 22:24, 6 December 2020 13:02, 17 January 2021 Adam Williams "rm paid edits clean-up tag, ""if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page"", no discussion was started - additionally I've looked through contributions from VentureKit and the CheckUser confirmed socks and don't currently think there's a major need for clean-up at this stage (they've not added any material I wouldn't have, to be honest). Happy to further discuss this"
47 DoorDash 1309 No 22:20, 6 December 2020 23:25, 9 December 2020 AleatoryPonderings Removed {{Undisclosed paid}} tag: I've done a pretty thorough review of the history and content and think I've addressed the WP:PROMO issues
48 Ibotta 117 Yes 22:19, 6 December 2020
49 Hims, Inc. 322 Yes 22:18, 6 December 2020
50 Phoenix Technologies 66 Yes 22:17, 6 December 2020
51 Chris Cox (Facebook) 155 Yes 22:16, 6 December 2020
52 Partners In Health 74 No 22:16, 6 December 2020 15:56, 18 January 2021 Jjjjjjjjjj Removing undisclosed paid editing tag, and fixing typo found in the process of reviewing the edits made by VentureKit and the confirmed sock puppets listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/VentureKit/Archive. See discussion at Talk:Partners_In_Health#Discussion_and_Process_Used_In_Removing_Undisclosed_Paid_Editing_Tag.
53 Sarah Gray Miller 5 Yes 22:10, 6 December 2020
54 ColourPop Cosmetics 134 No 22:09, 6 December 2020 22:01, 9 March 2021 Staticshakedown cleaned up so removing banner
55 Bustle (magazine) 74 Yes 22:07, 6 December 2020
56 Uber Eats 886 Yes 22:05, 6 December 2020
57 Edgewell Personal Care 119 Yes 22:04, 6 December 2020
58 Maxim (magazine) 658 Yes 22:00, 6 December 2020
59 Tivity Health 26 Yes 21:57, 6 December 2020
60 Sam Nazarian 114 Yes 21:56, 6 December 2020
61 Everyday Food 14 Yes 21:55, 6 December 2020
62 Rogers Communications 486 Yes 21:54, 6 December 2020
63 Today's Parent 4 Yes 21:54, 6 December 2020
64 Health (magazine) 28 Yes 21:53, 6 December 2020
65 Women's Health (magazine) 39 Yes 21:52, 6 December 2020
66 Project C.U.R.E. 8 Yes 21:51, 6 December 2020
67 Providence St. Joseph Health 34 Yes 21:50, 6 December 2020
68 Hospitals of Hope 2 Yes 21:49, 6 December 2020
69 CareFirst BlueCross BlueShield 29 Yes 21:46, 6 December 2020
70 Centene Corporation 322 Yes 21:41, 6 December 2020
71 Haven Healthcare 88 Yes 21:40, 6 December 2020
72 Encompass Health 103 No 21:39, 6 December 2020 13:44, 21 December 2020 IP address user Removed claim that article may have been created in return for undisclosed payments. No proof.
73 Yuma Regional Medical Center 10 No 21:38, 6 December 2020 22:01, 10 December 2020 Doc James updated and tonned down
74 Jeff Kindler 33 Yes 21:36, 6 December 2020
75 Michael Neidorff 22 Yes 21:34, 6 December 2020
76 AmerisourceBergen 225 Yes 21:33, 6 December 2020
77 Orlando Health 26 Yes 21:31, 6 December 2020
78 Northwest MedStar 1 Yes 21:29, 6 December 2020
79 ApothéCure Inc. 1 Yes 21:28, 6 December 2020
80 McKesson Corporation 468 Yes 21:27, 6 December 2020
81 Finastra 208 Yes 21:25, 6 December 2020
82 OraSure Technologies 12 Yes 21:24, 6 December 2020
83 Medco Health Solutions 41 Yes 21:24, 6 December 2020
84 Bellin Health 15 Yes 21:23, 6 December 2020
85 Mentor (company) 21 Yes 21:22, 6 December 2020
86 Pharmacia & Upjohn 61 Yes 21:20, 6 December 2020
87 Fidelis Care 52 Yes 21:20, 6 December 2020

Data on subject perspective
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can list here two exchanges relating to the VentureKit investigation between tagger and subject.

In both of these the employee seemed somewhat perplexed by the presence of the tag.

Data on edit warring relating to a tag
[edit]

By Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 19:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Empirically there are 3 articles where I've seen a kind of edit warring going on over the placement of the tag. Please note that by edit warring I just mean that one editor placed the tag, and then it was removed, and then it was put back. I don't mean that there was necessarily any kind of sustained manifested ill will between the editors.

For the ones associated with the VentureKit investigation after removal they've just generally stayed off.