Wikipedia's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes. | |
General | |
Articles and content | |
Page handling | |
User conduct | |
Other | |
Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN) | ||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. 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:
| ||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||
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: |
Writing about themselves on Wikipedia without disclosing COI. Myrealnamm's Alternate Account (talk) 15:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This user has been repeatedly warned about COI editing and as recently as May 2024 continues to edit articles with a suspected COI. Vegantics (talk) 18:36, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Warned this editor about their obvious conflict of interest and paid editing. They continued to edit the article in question, so here we are. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I work at Brigham and Women's Hospital and am David Bates's Executive Assistant, so updating his profile is within my normal job purview". What has changed in that hour? 81.187.192.168 (talk) 15:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi all! Sorry if this is weird; I've dabbled in Wikipedia editing off and on over the years, but I haven't looked at it for a while, so I'm honestly a little shaky on Wiki markup currently. My main user account is Taciturasa (talk · contribs), although it is currently inactive.
Essentially, I'm here to confirm that this IP belongs to the internal company VPN for AvePoint, and it appears to have provided a large amount of the edits to the AvePoint Wikipedia page (funnily, I just found this out after I poured coffee on my keyboard and almost made an accidental nonsense edit to the page for Adwaita (design language) while trying to clean it up).
I'm disclosing this because I've noticed before that the page kinda reeked of WP:PROMO and WP:COIEDIT. I really appreciate and align myself with Wikipedia's wish for a neutral PoV, and I think the evidence within the special contributions for this IP paint a pretty clear picture.
I think AvePoint as an entity could quite possibly qualify for notability, but it's pretty clear, both with it being known edits have come internally from CoI editors, as well as the advertisement-reading current status of the page, that it may need to be cleared of most of the information within it so it can be written more accurately.
Hope this helps! I'm not sure there's really any reason to notify other editors, since I don't know of the history of the page, but I know for sure this IP is involved, and I am currently this IP, but will certainly do what's needed (on my main account, if needed) to make good on that if you need it.
Will try to respond if there's any questions. Thank you! 38.105.223.146 (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here not knowing where else to go for the best, and in the spirit of WP:DOLT.
These IPs have slowly spent the day removing information from this Russian enemy of Putin. The first edit tried to quote our article Right to be forgotten, which is why I'm mentioning DOLT: they didn't make a legal threat, but I can see why they would want this person, and their location information, removing. This isn't the way to go about it, and I have no idea if we would even consider granting the removal of sourced information in this way, but that's all way above my pay grade and having better editors than I look into this seems a good idea.
I'm only going to inform the IPv4 editors of this thread, as anything else is just me chasing my tale. YMMV, of course. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 18:04, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pedestrian69 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Almost all of this user's contributions through their entire history here have involved promoting Arie and Elise Trouw, including by adding Elise to multiple lists of "Notable" people.
Most recently, the user created the Arie Trouw article for a second time after it was deleted previously, and the article (https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/?lang=en&title=Arie_Trouw&oldid=1229987095) was an embarrassing fluff piece that primarily cited Arie's personal website, claimed that him having a musician for a daughter "adds a unique aspect to his public persona", and included meaningless marketing fluff about his work "aiming to integrate physical and digital worlds through blockchain technology". Re-deletion is currently proposed - https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/en/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Arie_Trouw_(2nd_nomination).
I do not know precisely who this user is, but in my opinion it is obvious from their behaviour alone that they have some personal connection to the Trouw family and are editing for the purpose of promoting Arie and Elise, not for the purpose of improving Wikipedia.
Users have, on multiple occasions, raised COI concerns on the user's talk page. The user has never engaged with those discussions.
I'm not sure what appropriate next steps are, but given that engaging via Talk page has failed repeatedly over multiple years, I figured I should bring this to this Noticeboard for others to discuss. ExplodingCabbage (talk) 20:35, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following diff comment is what brought my attention to this, theres no reason other than a WP:COI to put that as the edit reason.
The user username leads me to beleive its a company possibly paid for by the person the article is about. TagKnife (talk) 23:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The user self identified as the person the page is about in this diff and continues to attempt to remove the content as out-of-date TagKnife (talk) 01:29, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This user was warned of COI editing on 3/7/2024 and recently edited the article for Jim Sikora. They have almost exclusively edited the article for Jim Sikora and you can see on their 10/26/2019 edit that they have made edits to the article at Sikora's request. Vegantics (talk) 14:31, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User Autodesplanifica contributions is a single purpose account which created a promotional account for a borderline notable academic. Back in April, I deleted the puff and queried whether there was a COI, which seems blatant to me. The user replied that there was not and accused me of vandalism (also by email). Over the weekend they returned to add more uncited promotional material and added a photo. I'd be grateful if somebody could take a look, thanks. Mujinga (talk) 17:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a BLP on a Swiss prodigy for which there is an article on the German Wikipedia, Maximilian Janisch. An English Wikipedia account, Maximilian Janisch (talk · contribs), uploaded a translated version of the German article to Maximilian Janisch, which I tagged for COI. The account owner has openly identified themselves as the BLP subject on their talk page. On the article talk page, they have proposed a 7-day discussion period after which they will remove the COI notice. I have brought it here as I don't think many editors will see the English article. I do notice that a similar named account has edited the German article. Aszx5000 (talk) 10:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
conflict of interest editing is discouraged but not forbidden, which is true, but "not forbidden" does not mean optional here; it means that you should follow the guideline in most circumstances, even though there are sometimes exceptions. Those exceptions are when it's in Wikipedia's interest to ignore the rule, and that doesn't appear to be the case here. I have nominated the article for deletion and suggest you don't engage with it further. You are welcome to edit other topics. – Joe (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Continued editing of an article that shares their username after being warned about a potential COI violation yesterday. Jdcomix (talk) 22:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Username walks the line of WP:UAA. Editor appears to be slowly turning the article into an advert for the college. Warned about COI, continued editing with no communication. 2A00:23C5:50E8:EE01:7DCA:43EC:BDAF:A739 (talk) 16:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone please look into the activities of this newbie Dssep? They're bypassing the formal AFC review process by moving drafts into the main NS. Specifically, they have moved drafts such as Draft:Umro Ayyar - A New Beginning (Diff ~1231533766) and Draft:Jaan Say Pyara Juni (Diff ~1231434817). Additionally, they seem to be associated with another new account Hypothetically007 with fewer than 1000 edits, likely acting as a meat puppet to assist in these moves such as Kabhi Main Kabhi Tum (Diff ~1231301770). This page was created by @Dssep. Furthermore, they are removing WP:UPE tags from these pages, which is concerning. I've advised them against this behavior, but they continue to do so. Some of these drafts were created or heavily edited by WP:UPE sock farms, suggesting a strong possibility that @Dssep, may be a paid editor, too. If moving drafts to the main NS without proper review becomes commonplace, it undermines the purpose of WP:AFC. This is not the first instance of such behavior from new accounts, but I felt it is now necessary to report it here. (talk I contribs) 06:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User has continued disruptive editing on an article that they have a conflict of interest on, despite being warned multiple times. Jdcomix (talk) 16:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editor adding unsourced material to this BLP. Editor commented on my Talk page ... I am currently in touch with him ... Editor has continued to edit the article despite CoI warning. Tacyarg (talk) 16:55, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]