Misplaced Pages

:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:16, 30 December 2023 view sourceTruedad21 (talk | contribs)214 edits →Richard A Cohen← Previous edit Revision as of 23:27, 30 December 2023 view source Truedad21 (talk | contribs)214 edits →Richard A Cohen: ReplyTag: ReplyNext edit →
Line 255: Line 255:
I have clearly responded to the COI questions ], and stated my affiliation, as a psychotherapist, with the subject of this article. Nothing I am accused of- having a positive point of view of Cohen, or a single-purpose account, is in violation of wiki rules, nor does my past and present relationship with Cohen constitute a COI (“sockpuppetry” is addressed in a follow-up comment). I am only guilty of experiencing a learning curve as an editor on Misplaced Pages, hence the improperly uploaded photos and overly-promotional rhetoric when I first began. I have, however, always sought balance and fairness, and have never unduly removed controversial or negative content unless the information was false and defamatory or the presentation was misleading and I could prove it. The edits of Generalrelative described above, however, are in violation of the rules and intent of Misplaced Pages, and I call upon Generalrelative (again) to reconsider them, and voluntarily correct these errors. I have clearly responded to the COI questions ], and stated my affiliation, as a psychotherapist, with the subject of this article. Nothing I am accused of- having a positive point of view of Cohen, or a single-purpose account, is in violation of wiki rules, nor does my past and present relationship with Cohen constitute a COI (“sockpuppetry” is addressed in a follow-up comment). I am only guilty of experiencing a learning curve as an editor on Misplaced Pages, hence the improperly uploaded photos and overly-promotional rhetoric when I first began. I have, however, always sought balance and fairness, and have never unduly removed controversial or negative content unless the information was false and defamatory or the presentation was misleading and I could prove it. The edits of Generalrelative described above, however, are in violation of the rules and intent of Misplaced Pages, and I call upon Generalrelative (again) to reconsider them, and voluntarily correct these errors.
] (]) 22:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC) ] (]) 22:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:In his now archived ], Generalrelative questions whether a comment posted by Lukehhuneycutt, claiming that the Cohen article has a clear negative bias, might be sockpuppetry, apparently suggesting that this comment was either manipulated or made incognito by me (the comment was on the article itself, and made no reference to me or my opinions). The red flags he pointed to were the facts that the Lukehhuneycutt account was created 4 days before this, its only posting. In the interest of the same transparency and truth I have tried to demonstrate regarding my affiliation (or lack thereof) with Cohen, I will explain my relationship (or lack thereof) to this independent comment:
:Once Generalrelative began consistently rejecting my attempts to restore balance and neutrality to the article by rolling back any and all of my edits based upon my purported COI, I decided to encourage others to read the Cohen BLP and respond to it as they saw fit. Generalrelative had noted I was the only person commenting and editing the article with a favorable view of its subject, even though it was also only Generalrelative, cheered on by the activist Zenomonoz, who is him/herself the subject of a ], editing out Cohen’s own voice and achievements from this supposed '''biography''', insisting that the subject be defined by others’ judgments of him. In the past Generalrelative’s distorting role was fulfilled by only 1 other account- Sexologist, whose voice is eerily reminiscent of Zenomonoz, and is in fact one of the accounts accused of being Zenomonoz' sockpuppets. Besides these 3 accounts (2 people?) A grand total of 3 other comments rightly critiqued the overly promotional tone of my early edits three years ago. Generalrelative suggested, according to Wiki rules for COI and Contentious Topics, that I bring any recommended edits to the Talk Page for consensus, but did not respond to my initial attempts to do so, nor did anyone else. It was just the three of us- Generalrelative, Zenomonoz and myself. Now he rejects the edits of others claiming a ”consensus” that has never been established.
:In September, 2023, I made a number of professional colleagues and clients aware of the Richard A. Cohen page. I asked them to read the content, and if they were dissatisfied with the factuality and fairness of its presentation, I encouraged them to create an account, express themselves on the Talk Page, and if they were inclined and capable, to participate in the editing process, hopefully improving its balance and fairness. I did nothing more- no recommendations on what to say or characterizations of what they’d find. Then I stepped away for the last 3 months, as I have been travelling internationally. I am quite sure that the Lukehhuneycutt account is real and the comment is genuine… neither have anything to do with me.
:] (]) 23:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:27, 30 December 2023

"WP:COIN" redirects here. For the WikiProject on articles about coins, see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Numismatics.
Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages'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,
content
Page handling
User conduct
Other
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards
    Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
    ShortcutsSections 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-wp@wikipedia.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?
    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
    To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:

    Search the COI noticeboard archives
    Help answer requested edits
    Category:Misplaced Pages conflict of interest edit requests is where COI editors have placed the {{edit COI}} template: Misplaced Pages conflict of interest edit requests Talk:260 Collins Talk:American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers Talk:American Speech–Language–Hearing Association Talk:Pamela Anderson Talk:Aspen Dental Talk:Atlantic Union Bank Talk:AvePoint Talk:Edward J. Balleisen Talk:Moshe Bar (neuroscientist) Talk:BEE Japan Talk:Edi Birsan Talk:Edouard Bugnion Talk:Bunq Talk:Captions (app) Talk:Charles Martin Castleman Talk:Connie Chan (politician) Talk:Chyanne Chen Talk:Pamela Chesters Talk:Cofra Holding Talk:Cohen Milstein Talk:Chris Daniels (musician) Talk:Dell Technologies Talk:Adela Demetja Talk:Doncaster College Talk:Foster and Partners Talk:Richard France (writer) Talk:Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (novel) Talk:Steven Grinspoon Talk:Grizzly Creek Fire Talk:Group-IB Talk:Henley & Partners Talk:Insight Meditation Society Talk:International Motors Talk:Daymond John Talk:Norma Kamali Talk:David Lalloo Talk:Gigi Levy-Weiss Talk:List of PEN literary awards Talk:Los Angeles Jewish Health Talk:Anne Sofie Madsen Talk:Laurence D. Marks Talk:Alexa Meade Talk:Metro AG Talk:Alberto Musalem Talk:NAPA Auto Parts Talk:NextEra Energy Talk:Matthew Parish Talk:Barbara Parker (California politician) Talk:PetSmart Charities Talk:QuinStreet Talk:Sharp HealthCare Talk:SolidWorks Talk:Vladimir Stolyarenko Talk:Sysco Talk:Shuntarō Tanikawa Talk:Tencent Cloud Talk:Tiger Global Management Talk:Trendyol Talk:UnitedHealth Group Talk:University of Toronto Faculty of Arts and Science Talk:Scott Wiener Talk:Alex Wright (author) Talk:Xero (company) Talk:Zions Bancorporation

    Swiss Mister in NY

    In a recent BLPN discussion Swiss Mister in NY seems to be denying they have a COI with Emmanuel Lemelson albeit without explicitly saying it. They have weirdly accused those established editors opposing their changes of having a COI Emmanuel Lemelson seems to have a long history of COI editing take a look at the template at Talk:Emmanuel Lemelson. What I found interesting is this account is actually fairly old although with very limited edit history especially before 2023. When I explored that edit history it got even more interesting.

    Swiss Mister's first major (undeleted?) contribution seems to have been creating Intelitek back in 2011. They returned to that article this year for some updates . This was about a year after Special:Contributions/Grahamceline had made a hash of trying to update it. Per the discussion at User talk:Grahamceline, it seems Grahamceline had a COI regarding Intelitek.

    Then in 2013 they added mentions of Distil Networks to 2 different articles . Distil Networks was deleted quite a few years later in 2018 and per the AFD, had been created by WMF banned (Meta:Special:CentralAuth/Gogo Rulez) Special:Contributions/Gogo Rulez. Putting the WMF ban aside, about 2 years later an editor open with their COI User talk:Tonybdistil was involved so we know there was some COI relating to Distil Networks. Gogo Rulez themselves added Distil Networks to the Content protection network article and about a month later at the time they were adding the mentions to the article article, Swiss Mister in NY removed the orphan tag from CPN . CPN itself was created by Special:Contributions/Prelude after noon back in 2012 . But given the long time between creation and the interesting addition of Distil Networks, I'm not sure what to make of that even considering this interesting comment from Prelude . (Distil Networks has been bought by Imperva so I suspect any COI risk has changed.)

    A few months later still in 2013, Swiss Mister reappeared and one of the things they did was write in support of keeping some images labelled unfree for Michael Dweck. As remarked in the discussion Misplaced Pages:Possibly unfree files/2013 December 15 the changing of the Flickr account to say it clearly belonged to Michael Dweck made it seem possible it was being done in response to the discussion. And interesting enough Special:Contributions/Avian appreciator who uploaded the images, seems a long term SPA regarding Michael Dweck. Note also this wasn't Swiss Mister's first interest in Dweck. nearly 3 years previously back in 2011, they had tried to add a NFCC image .

    I'm not an admin so cannot see anything deleted like the history of Distil Networks. Also to be clear, I'm not accusing Swiss Mister of being a sock of the other editors. In fact for most of them I think it seems more likely they are not a sock.

    Nil Einne (talk) 04:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

    A quick scan through the 85 deleted edits on Distil Networks didn't show up anything particularly interesting. —Smalljim  11:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
    I have notified everyone I mentioned in my comment except for Gogo Rulez as I don't see a purpose in notifying a globally locked editor banned by the WMF. Nil Einne (talk) 04:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

    Comment: Seems like an awful lot of investigative work for someone to undertake because an accusation that two editors have been circling a biography and reverting other editors and even an admin for well on half a dozen years or more was found to be "weird." And only to conclude that I'm probably not a sockpuppet at work! Hey, thanks! Regardless, I hope that someone will let me know specifically which of my hundreds of edits has weakened Misplaced Pages in some material way? Until then, I'll continue editing in the ways that I have been, but probably avoiding articles where vested editors have assumed an ownership role. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 14:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

    That seems like awfully long way go saying that the accusation of COI is spot on. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
    Is that the new standard for COI investigations? I mean, who actually loses their password to Misplaced Pages? That seems very suspicious to me. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 16:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
    The standard for COI investigations is "Is there a COI?" what isn't part of the COI standards is "weakened Misplaced Pages in some material way" because COI editing weakens wikipedia no matter the quality of the edits. You appear to be acknowledging that you do in fact have a COI, you just don't to say as much explicitly but you also don't want to deny it because you appear honest. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:26, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
    While I don't feel required to even say this, I assure you I'm not being paid by any company to edit any page anywhere on Misplaced Pages. I am not Mr. Lemelson, nor am I a member of his family, nor do I live near him. I don't know what more you need me to say, but I have a feeling it will never be enough. Like I said, this all seems like an unusually vigorous defense of two editors who have taken personal control of a biography for the better part of a decade. I'm happy to edit elsewhere, and if I should ever get up the courage to concern myself with that biography again, I'll seek permission from the ruling editorial pair on the Talk page. - Swiss Mister in NY (talk) 02:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

    A few days ago I set out the history of COI editing on Emmanuel Lemelson at WP:BLP/N#Emmanuel_Lemelson (diff), under a section started by the editor in question. Having followed the Lemelson article and engaged with the COI editor(s) for many years, it's clear to me that the current editor is a continuation of the same. The duck test is very persuasive. I'm far too involved to take any admin actions though.  —Smalljim  11:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

    COIN concerns on Jim Mellon and elsewhere

    User:U78u87 has been making a number of edits on Jim Mellon and elsewhere that seem clearly promotional in nature in ways that make WP:DUCK hard to avoid. See my comments on their talk page and their response. Many of their edits there and elsewhere (eg. ) seem weirdly focused on "philanthropy" by CEOs and / or removing criticism of them. This doesn't mean that all the removals are inappropriate, of course (these are articles that have had little attention previously) but the sum total of their edits seems hard to credit as normal editing; the particular edit that pushed me over the edge is their most recent one on that page - I can buy that some editors are deeply concerned with being as cautious as possible about BLP-sensitive statements about CEOs, certainly; I can even buy that that same editor also wants to make sure everyone knows about their philanthropy, though as my comment implies it made me a bit suspicious. I can't accept that they are also deeply concerned with wording the details of IPOs and and acquisitions by related companies in clearly promotional terms. And the bulk of their other edits focus on CEOs, popular musicians, and related articles in a similar way - all people who could reasonably employ a person or agency to burnish their Misplaced Pages articles and which therefore raise concerns about paid editing. They're also, as an aside, a new account who seems intimately familiar with invoking WP:BLP. --Aquillion (talk) 20:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

    Revanth Reddy

    Article being heavily edited by user with name similar to subject. Also heavy edits from an IP over the last couple days. User was provided a COI notice on their talk page but has not responded. Just requesting eyes for anyone more familiar with the topic. CNMall41 (talk) 22:51, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

    I also just notified user of this thread. My oversight for not doing it when originally filed. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

    Better Than Cash Alliance

    This article has had a significant portion of it written by what appear to be COI editors. Thriley (talk) 06:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

    The first editor seems to have a direct link to Better Than Cash Alliance in what is a highly promotional UPE article that subverts Misplaced Pages controls. scope_creep 10:22, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

    WP:SELFCITE at Euler polynomial

    More eyes, please. Interest of the WP:SPAs has been adding content sourced to articles by Hurtado Benavides and Miguel Ángel. In Euler polynomial, this especially appears WP:UNDUE. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

    Gilles Epié

    The editor has acknowledged a personal relationship with the article subject and does not seem to understand how this presents a conflict of interest. They continue to make edits despite more than one warning. BlueWhale89 (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

    AlanMichaelSheppard

    This user page, the only edition in Wikipeda, seems to be self-promotional from websites like https://www.alansheppard.com/ and https://www.alansheppard.com/about. May an administrator have a look and decide if the page is or isn't proper. Pierre cb (talk) 00:29, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

    Wrathofyazdan socks

    AngelOnTheRocks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is involved in undisclosed paid editing. Harry A. Hyman was created after they were hired on this freelancer job. ‎Jun Li (chemist) was create after a gap of 3 weeks, so this is a spam-only account and as such should be blocked. Any one who can help discover the original WP:SPI? In any case, this is not a new account. 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 11:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

    Just wanted to note that both are eligible for draftification per WP:ATD-I. Both articles are not older than 90 days (Harry A. Hyman was created on 29 September 2023 and Jun Li was created on 18 October 2023). 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 11:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
    I found another GhazaleAryan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log): Sarvnaz Alambeigi was created based on this job (listed on page3). So Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Wrathofyazdan is the correct SPI. 2001:8F8:1E3D:2F41:1FCF:914:2C35:471A (talk) 12:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

    Elliott Sharp

    Fenderjoe edits nearly exclusively on Elliot Sharp and articles peripheral to him for many years such as adding his name into record label pages. COI notice left on talk page, but returned to editing the same page with no explanation. Tamberrrr removed maintenance templates without explanation and appears to be a sleeper associated with the article subject. Graywalls (talk) 15:04, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

    Draft:Torres Castle (Al Hoceima)


    Apparent UPE: Ali Maalouf makes 8 pointless wikify edits, writes the draft and submits it for review within ten minutes. Ali Maalouf then contacts several experienced editors for review. Four and a half hours later new editor Trabeltomed moves the draft into mainspace. Trabeltomed's prior edits were all made today: 11 wikify edits to game the system. While there is surely puppetting of some type, I'm concerned about promoting a tourist destination probably for pay. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

    There is no advertisement or anything like that. It is a cultural architecture that you can search for through Google. As for (Trabeltomed), I do not know the reason he moved the draft and I did not contact him. I contacted some officials to review the article. I will only leave you some sources. You decide to decide.
    https://ar.hibapress.com/details-415938.html
    https://achamal24.ma/archives/24247
    https://dalil-rif.com/permalink/30177.html Ali Maalouf (talk) 22:56, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
    Both of these accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. Liz 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
    Just curious, but what is the evidence? Miracusaurs (talk) 03:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    @Miracusaurs: Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Simodabir0. I provided my rationale above, which is "evidence" enough. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

    Paid editing agency

    I found a page on the website of a paid editing agency, which lists the following articles as created by them:

    The pages should be checked for policy violations. It should also be checked whether authors have declared being paid. Janhrach (talk) 16:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

    Vishen Lakhiani: Created by Taniasafuan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a single purpose account, unsuccessfully nominated for AfD, suspected sock: Princesstowarrior (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Janhrach (talk) 19:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    They are already a known and globally banned entity, see Misplaced Pages:List_of_paid_editing_companies#Wikibusiness. It's not unusual for such agencies to list articles they did not actually have a hand in creating, none-the-less it is a good idea to check them. ~ ONUnicornproblem solving 19:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    I will check them one-by-one. Even if they aren't created by Wikibusines, the circumstances of the creation of this one are very suspicious. I have nominated it for deletion. Janhrach (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    Andreas Umland: created by Stonepillar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), large edits by Миша историк (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and Inkitrinky (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), COI edits by Andreumland (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This article is ambiguous, I am leaving this to other editors. Janhrach (talk) 20:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    I Sent Qonto (neobank) and Adjarabet to Afd. scope_creep 13:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    Qonto (neobank) was created by Pcheetpcheet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), a single-purpose account, clearly gamed the system to get the article out of userspace. Janhrach (talk) 20:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    The user has edits to other Wikimedia wikis, I will review this later. Janhrach (talk) 20:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    I have notified other wikis of this user. Janhrach (talk) 15:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
    Adjarabet was created by Hubble (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) – a single-purpose account, gaming the system. Notable edits by Lemonisto (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Janhrach (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    The latter is unlikely to be paid. The former has edits to Wikidata and kawiki (over 2000!). kawiki should be notified of this. Janhrach (talk) 20:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    kawiki notified of Hubble. Wikidata edits look good-faith, though most are related to interwiki links to kawiki or labels in Georgian, so I am not sure. Janhrach (talk) 09:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    Kobi Sitt

    As much as I'd like to assume good faith, something doesn't look quite right with an account registered in 2008 having zero edits until coming in nearly six years later and make 21 edits with skills suggesting its not their first time editing. This account is possibly part of a farm. While I know SPI is the right place if I have the slightest idea of associated accounts, I am not sure. Graywalls (talk) 10:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

    Zheng Chongbin (artist)

    This article is being originated by an editor with 37 edits. When the article has been nominated for deletion, the editor asks: Please just let me know what exactly I need to do to get this article published. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:08, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    Thank you for your question. I can confirm that I am an independent researcher and do not represent the artist. I am new to writing on Misplaced Pages and this was the first and only time I tried to write an article here. I am willing to take feedback on board, that is why it is important for me to understand what exactly needs to be improved about the article as I believe that the general guidelines are already addressed in the article. For more details, please see my answer on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Zheng Chongbin (Artist). Many thanks. Artbranch (talk) 21:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

    International Churches of Christ

    JamieBrown2011 has a confirmed COI here, but continues to add promotional content to the article based on primary sources, against consensus and despite being warned not to do so, including at User talk:JamieBrown2011#October 2023. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

    I added a description of HOPEww using Charity Navigator as a source, which is an independent reliable 3rd party and simply a statement about the existence of the organization from the official page of the ICOC WP:ABOUTSELF. It is not promotional or controversial. I am happy to discuss the sources and wording on the Talk page. JamieBrown2011 (talk) 11:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    @JamieBrown2011: That would indeed appear to be promotional, what makes you think it isn't? Horse Eye's Back (talk) 11:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    So this is the text in dispute:
    “The ICOC directly administers or partners with over a dozen organizations. Some function as appendages of the church; others are entirely unrelated in their mission and activities. HOPE worldwide, a charitable foundation started as the benevolent arm of the ICOC, which serves as the primary beneficiary of the church's charitable donations for the poor. According to Charity Navigator, America's largest independent charity evaluator, they have assigned HOPE Worldwide:
    An "Accountability & Transparency" rating of 100 out of 100.
    A "Financial" rating of 89.4 out of 100.
    An "Overall" rating of 4 out of 4 stars, with the Overall score of 89.4 out of 100.”
    And the references are:
    - Is there anything unreliable about the sources?
    - Is there anything in the wording that should be changed so it is more factual and less promotional?
    - I am editing on my phone so please excuse any incorrect formatting JamieBrown2011 (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    Yeah thats promotional... It is clearly intended to promote the subject through pushing undue use of primary sources. Note that this is not a content discussion, this is a behavior discussion. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    OK, my bad. Thanks for clarifying. JamieBrown2011 (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

    References

    1. "Charity Navigator Rating - HOPE worldwide". Charity Navigator.
    2. www.hopeww.org

    Ethirneechal (TV series)

    The user linked above is constantly editing the article with promotional content, seeking to advertise the series. I and many others have reverted her edits many times, however she constantly readds them. I have also warned her once, but the many reverts should signal that something she is doing is wrong to her. — Karnataka 16:32, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

    I have warned the user also, and specifically cautioned against the poor grammar of this repeated addition. Bishonen | tålk 17:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC).

    Richard A Cohen

    This comment and follow-up are in response to a recent COI notice regarding my editing of the Cohen BLP, archived here. I have responded to ALL questions about my interest in the topic and my relationship to the subject, and refuted concerns about any COI on the Richard A. Cohen and Generalrelative talk pages months ago. In the meantime, Generalrelative has continued to foster a biased, anti-encyclopedic BIOGRAPHY by:

    1. Removing all self-published books by Cohen, listed not as sources, but simply as a biographical record of Cohen’s work and ideas, claiming “It is unclear that this list is of encyclopedic value.” This is despite the fact that several of these books have been re-published by professional publishing houses in as many as 8 languages, and in any case self-published works are included in the publications lists of many biographical Misplaced Pages pages. I am not aware that Generalrelative has removed any self-published work from ANY other page. Misplaced Pages cautions about using self-published works as sources, but has no rules preventing these as part of a subject’s work, teaching or accomplishments (duh!).

    2. When I responded by listing the original versions of 2 of Cohen’s initial works, published independently by respected Houses (Oakhill and Intervarsity Press), Generalrelative removed even these as well, stating “establish consensus on Talk Page before re-adding disputed content,” despite the fact that this was NEW content, and had not been disputed by anyone. When I pointed this out on the article’s Talk Page, Generalrelative responded, “If Cohen's work is accepted by mainstream scholarship, you should be able to show e.g. supportive reviews of his books in mainstream publications. Absent that, even books published by non-vanity presses are probably not notable for inclusion in the encyclopedia.” Again, I doubt that Generalrelative would suggest that “Mein Kampf” be removed from Hitler’s biographical page for lack of mainstream acceptance, and question whether he has removed professionally published works from ANY other biographical Wiki page.

    Despite this questionable requirement for “positive” scholarly reviews as a test for newsworthiness (in a biography!!!), I am linking below and posting for Generalrelative a review of Cohen’s very first, Oakhill published “Coming Out Straight” from Library Journal, where a gay-identified librarian and sexuality scholar called it a “…comprehensive, well-written, well-organized, and heavily referenced guide,” and calls Cohen’s approach “… sympathetic and rational,” calling it "recommended for libraries with large gender collections." Generalrelative has continued to roll back every attempt I made to list Cohen’s published books, justifying it with concerns about my purported COI.

    3. Wiki Manual of Style states clearly that articles on controversial topics should be written “from a neutral point of view,” include BOTH SIDES of a controversy, and that lead paragraphs be a summary of the article. Yet Generalrelative has violated these guidelines by identifying Cohen with “Conversion Therapy” (even in this COI complaint) while removing Cohen’s own statements to the contrary, and eliminating his written works that clearly demonstrate Cohen’s legitimate, research-based therapeutic perspective. He has removed references to Cohen’s personal journey and experience, while retaining negative (even false) characterizations of Cohen’s life and work referenced from activists who clearly consider him an enemy, and have an axe to grind. This is effectively censoring Cohen, distorting a biographical article and perverting Misplaced Pages’s encyclopedic intent. Despite Generalrelative’s mild, polite demeanor, it is these egregious actions, as well as auto-rejecting my own and others’ attempts to seek balance, in the guise of a purported COI and claiming “consensus” which is 2 people, he and Zenomonoz, an aggressive, apparent activist who was himself accused of sockpuppetry, that prompted my “intemperate remarks” about feeling cancelled myself. It is 2 accounts vs 1... what "consensus" is that?

    I have clearly responded to the COI questions ], and stated my affiliation, as a psychotherapist, with the subject of this article. Nothing I am accused of- having a positive point of view of Cohen, or a single-purpose account, is in violation of wiki rules, nor does my past and present relationship with Cohen constitute a COI (“sockpuppetry” is addressed in a follow-up comment). I am only guilty of experiencing a learning curve as an editor on Misplaced Pages, hence the improperly uploaded photos and overly-promotional rhetoric when I first began. I have, however, always sought balance and fairness, and have never unduly removed controversial or negative content unless the information was false and defamatory or the presentation was misleading and I could prove it. The edits of Generalrelative described above, however, are in violation of the rules and intent of Misplaced Pages, and I call upon Generalrelative (again) to reconsider them, and voluntarily correct these errors. 

    Truedad21 (talk) 22:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    In his now archived COI notice, Generalrelative questions whether a comment posted by Lukehhuneycutt, claiming that the Cohen article has a clear negative bias, might be sockpuppetry, apparently suggesting that this comment was either manipulated or made incognito by me (the comment was on the article itself, and made no reference to me or my opinions). The red flags he pointed to were the facts that the Lukehhuneycutt account was created 4 days before this, its only posting. In the interest of the same transparency and truth I have tried to demonstrate regarding my affiliation (or lack thereof) with Cohen, I will explain my relationship (or lack thereof) to this independent comment:
    Once Generalrelative began consistently rejecting my attempts to restore balance and neutrality to the article by rolling back any and all of my edits based upon my purported COI, I decided to encourage others to read the Cohen BLP and respond to it as they saw fit. Generalrelative had noted I was the only person commenting and editing the article with a favorable view of its subject, even though it was also only Generalrelative, cheered on by the activist Zenomonoz, who is him/herself the subject of a sockpuppetry investigation, editing out Cohen’s own voice and achievements from this supposed biography, insisting that the subject be defined by others’ judgments of him. In the past Generalrelative’s distorting role was fulfilled by only 1 other account- Sexologist, whose voice is eerily reminiscent of Zenomonoz, and is in fact one of the accounts accused of being Zenomonoz' sockpuppets. Besides these 3 accounts (2 people?) A grand total of 3 other comments rightly critiqued the overly promotional tone of my early edits three years ago. Generalrelative suggested, according to Wiki rules for COI and Contentious Topics, that I bring any recommended edits to the Talk Page for consensus, but did not respond to my initial attempts to do so, nor did anyone else. It was just the three of us- Generalrelative, Zenomonoz and myself. Now he rejects the edits of others claiming a ”consensus” that has never been established.
    In September, 2023, I made a number of professional colleagues and clients aware of the Richard A. Cohen page. I asked them to read the content, and if they were dissatisfied with the factuality and fairness of its presentation, I encouraged them to create an account, express themselves on the Talk Page, and if they were inclined and capable, to participate in the editing process, hopefully improving its balance and fairness. I did nothing more- no recommendations on what to say or characterizations of what they’d find. Then I stepped away for the last 3 months, as I have been travelling internationally. I am quite sure that the Lukehhuneycutt account is real and the comment is genuine… neither have anything to do with me.
    Truedad21 (talk) 23:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
    Categories: