Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:53, 27 December 2012

Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
Shortcuts WP:COI/N WP:COIN WP:COIBOARD Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. Click here to purge this page (For help, see Misplaced Pages: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 Misplaced Pages 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 Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution procedural policy.
When starting a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on their talk page. 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 Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest guideline.
Are you in the right place? An editor can be biased without additionally having a COI. Issues involving bias may be more suited to Misplaced Pages:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard. Issues involving the biographies of living persons policy (BLP) may be more suited to Misplaced Pages:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. Commercial usernames should be reported to Misplaced Pages:Usernames for administrator attention. Obvious cases of corporate vanity can be tagged with {{db-spam}}. Articles written about a person, group, club or band by such a person, group, club or band with no assertion of notability can be tagged with {{db-bio}} instead. This page is not for reporting simple vandalism, material that can easily be fixed or removed without argument, or non-conflict of interest breaches of the neutral point of view policy. Notes for volunteers To close a report Add Template:Resolved at the head of the complaint, with the reason for closing and your signature. Old issues are taken away by the archive bot. Other ways to help All editors are encouraged to help resolve reports of COI editing. More problematic articles can be found in Category:Misplaced Pages articles with possible conflicts of interest. Category:Misplaced Pages conflict of interest edit requests. Editors who believe they have a conflict of interest may ask someone else to make edits for them. Please visit this category and respond to one of these requests. Whether you perform it or not, you should edit the parameter of the {{edit COI}} when you are done to remove the article from the category. Leave a Talk comment for the requester to explain your decision.
To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:

Stephen Aarons

A defense attorney who first paid someone to create an article about himself, and now adding various inappropriate references to himself and vigorously defending his article's AfD. OhNoitsJamie 17:58, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Response: I am the defense attorney. I did not pay someone to create an article about me. I did vigorously defend my article's AfD for notabilty and identified myself properly. I do not believe that is improper. However, I do agree that my reference to myself in Tesuque, New Mexico was inappropriate. It has been removed. I am brand new to Wiki editor COI customs and procedures, and did not understand I should not make self serving references. Steve Aarons (talk) 18 December 2012 —Preceding undated comment added 18:45, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

You have a clear conflict of interest so you are strongly encouraged not to edit the article or comment at AFD. Oh and you do say on your talk page that you are working with "professional Wiki author"...what does that mean other than paying someone to write or edit an article?--ukexpat (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

A $5 search fee at fiverr or a free cup of coffee should not create a conflict of interest. A greater danger stems from deletionist bias without any rational basis. As a fledgling editor -this is my first week here - i will heed the Conflict of interest editing on Misplaced Pages suggestion on the article in question and "propose edits to other editors on article talk pages, and seek their feedback." Steve Aarons (talk)

AfD page editing: Changes made to comments under an IP and is voting on his own page to keep. He has now voted twice. PeterWesco (talk) 19:00, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Request for help with revisions to MindManager article

In recent weeks, I've been working for the company Mindjet in order to make some updates to the article for their software product MindManager. I've posted my proposed revisions at Talk:MindManager, and one volunteer editor, User:Ronz looked at things and seemed okay with the changes that I proposed, but it now appears that he won't have time to actually move them over into the mainspace. I'm hoping someone from here might be able to take a look at the revisions that I've proposed and, assuming everything looks okay, go ahead and make the changes. Thanks so much! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 23:12, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Done! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 16:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

ASCII Group

I had speedied this as a copyvio a few days ago, the editor requested the source via email, but when I obliged returned copyright violating material to the page (then in their userspace). Over the course of the next couple days, I outlined all the things I thought were wrong with the article and removed all the copyright violating material (I hope), but it seems like the editor is not making the changes necessary to make the article neutral and verifiable. The discussion is on the talk page. The editor stated their conflict of interest there but then removed it, so I'll leave it to folks to check the talk page history if they're interested. I think the article should be AFD'd for the reasons I outlined on the talk page but I'd like to step back from this so I'd like to leave it in the capable hands of folks here. Thanks much! delldot ∇. 02:49, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Jack Royerton

As I pointed out here, there is an IP editor () who geolocates to Flagler College in Florida and keeps adding unsourced claims regarding a certain Jack Royerton to a wide selection of articles ranging from folk and rock music to theological topics. Apparently there is a Jack Royerton on the college's staff, raising the possibility of a conflict of interest (i. e., that the IP is either Royerton or one of his students). Most of these claims seem to be almost impossible to verify, since there is almost nothing about Royerton on the internet and a Google search for him consists almost entirely of sites that mirror Misplaced Pages. Perhaps someone should consider contacting him (or whomever is editing on his behalf), if there is a way of doing so, and asking him to provide reliable sources backing up the claim about him. LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 16:45, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

I added a more detailed notification to the IP user's talk page. If he's still using that IP, hopefully he'll notice it and respond. LonelyBoy2012 (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Scott F. Wolter

• Scott F. Wolter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Hookedx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hookedx claims to be the subject of this article and is reverting material critical of him with the edit summary "Nielsen is publishing his opinion based on negative personal bias. My geological work on the KRS was peer-reviewed by eight geologists and it is inappropriate for a engineer to publish comments about geological research he once supported." When he did it the first time I gave him a COI warning, but he's done it again with the edit summary "I will now be filing a complaint with Wikiepedia". I'll tell him about this discussion on his talk page now. I don't see any BLP issues as the edits are sourced and attributed and relevant. Dougweller (talk) 15:52, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

comment: Does Wolter, or his theories, have any notability? The article appears to be WP:FRINGE and WP:PROMO (Google infobox glory / Book sales) with the only people who care seem to be the subject of the article and the person who disputes his findings. Seems like an AfD candidate with a possible merge of his glorious one paragraph into Kensington Runestone. PeterWesco (talk) 19:48, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

That was my thought too - and I suspect that the books may possibly be self-published. AndyTheGrump (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Hank Harrison editing his own article and removing negative material

• Hank Harrison (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Stone Savant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Stone Savant has been removing negative material from this article and added a link to an anonymous polygraph test on Harrison's site with text saying "In 2011 he took and passed a series of Polygraph tests proving he is not racist or anti - semetic and did not give his daughter drugs at any time." which I removed as clearly not a WP:RS, containing material not in the source and also claiming a polygraph test can prove something. I found a talk page in which he said he had uploaded an image of Hank Harrison and that it was copyright to Hank Harrison and assumed a close relationship and COI. He posted to my talk page saying " I do not have a close relationship with Hank Harrison. I Just took a snap and assumed I would be able to post it." So I assumed good faith and withdrew the COI allegations I made at BLPN over his continued removal of negative material (he is now at 3RR). Another editor noted that he is signing as zendogg@gmail.com which is Harrison's contact address.. shows that this is Harrison himself. See also User:Stone Savant Dougweller (talk) 06:34, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

How to deal with COI

I was recently investigating a source that kept popping up in one or two articles and seemed somewhat dodgy. One user was responsible for adding the source. While investigating, I found that one of the people behind the source bears an uncanny resemblance to the user's self-description on his/her userpage. (Being any more specific than this would come very close to outing.)

How do I deal with this?

elvenscout742 (talk) 06:53, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages noticeboards
• Misplaced Pages dispute resolution