Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

Click here to post a question to the Conflict of interest noticeboard

Runza

Hello. I am seeing a probable COI edit on an article that I'm watching, Runza, here. Could someone with experience in such matters contact the editor please? I would do it myself, but I'm not familiar with the procedure and I'm a bit pressed for time at the moment. P.S. A related article that the editor has not changed, so far anyway, is Runza (restaurant). Thanks. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 14:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 17:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@@Midwestern 89.199.101.252 (talk) 05:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Why doesn't the history of the main WP:COIN page go past 1 September 2022?

It occurs only in desktop view, but it happens on both my iPad and my computer, on separate browsers, so it's not a cache issue. So what else could it be? 2001:4453:5F7:6400:D589:6509:59B2:C9EA (talk) 15:14, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

Update: The history page is updating, but not as often as it used to. New edits don't appear immediately, like it used to. (Note: I am the OP; my IP address just changed.) 2001:4453:5F7:6400:4889:C000:3A41:B55A (talk) 06:28, 4 September 2022 (UTC)

I think you are seeing the same thing described at WP:VPT#Article History not up-to-date when logged out. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Also, if you are searching for something, you can look in the archive of past discussions. Netherzone (talk) 01:10, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Reports with no prior engagement

There are a least three sections currently on COIN, where reports have been raised with no prior attempt to notify the editors accused of having a CoI of our policies, to ask them to abide by those policies, nor indeed to welcome them to Wikipedia. What's more, in each case the accused editors have mode only one edit.

As I have pointed out in those sections, a note at the top of the page states quite clearly: "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."

We are losing the opportunity to turn such editors into the beneficial, policy-abiding, contributors, which at least some of them could become. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

Suggestions for Improvements in COI disclosure requirements

I was told that WP:COIN was the appropriate place to make suggestions for making COI disclosure for "Paid" editors, more appropriate. Right now, there is one template (Paid) which is used to apply to many different situations of COI which do not really apply, or only indirectly apply. This can be at the least, misleading, and sometimes can be completely incorrect. IMO, Wikipedia should provide other templates which would be more appropriate than the "Paid" template. For example:

1. According to Wikipedia, even if you're just a volunteer for a company, you're required to use this disclosure, which 'incorrectly' states that you were paid for the article.
2. Likewise, if you're even a part-time employee of a company, and have never been paid by the company for the article, you still have to use the paid template, which is misleading.

Here's my suggestion for alternatives that may be more appropriate in these cases:

Rather than:
Paid:UserName, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by CompanyName for their contributions to Wikipedia.

Sometimes, more appropriate alternatives would be:
1. Volunteer: UserName, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they are a volunteer for CompanyName.
2. Employee: UserName, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they are an employee of CompanyName.

This way, the editor can correctly state their relationship to the company and the article. Ising4jesus (talk) 14:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Does anyone know what happened with Saudi Arabia trying to edit Wikipedia?

I'm looking into the issue but I can't find any sources/articles on it here, or any centralized discussion of the whole problem. Does anyone know where I can find this? 35.2.38.93 (talk) 15:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

This board is for discussion about the operation of the COI noticeboard. Requests for help should be made at the Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Presentation on COI

I've issued a public invitation to an online meeting where I will give a presentation on conflict of interests. That invitation was posted within one of the investigation discussions and so that it's not lost to page watchers, I thought I'd post it on this talk page.

The New Zealand Wiki community has its monthly online meeting later today. Anyone can join in and we usually have a few Australians turn up, i.e. it's not just a domestic meeting, with overseas editors most welcome. I'll be talking about COI editing so that we as a community learn something from the investigation that's going on, with a goal of achieving broader understanding of how to manage COIs. Anyone watching this page is most welcome to join in: Wikipedia:Meetup/Aotearoa New Zealand Online/49#Conflict of interest editing. I've asked the organiser to be on the programme in second slot so that there's an approximate time available for those who are only interested in this topic; tune in from 12:15 h NZT, which is UTC+12:00. Time zone conversion link for your convenience. Schwede66 20:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Here's a link to the presentation; feel free to use the presentation and modify it as you see fit. It went well; there was a healthy amount of interest. The editors who spoke gave feedback like "I've learned a lot", "I'm definitely going to add conflict of interest statements to my user page", or "that was really useful, thank you". Schwede66 05:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)