Talk:Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Tedder (talk | contribs) at 00:10, 18 October 2024 (add diff). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 00:10, 18 October 2024 by Tedder (talk | contribs) (add diff)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days

To report conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages, please visit the COI noticeboard.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Misplaced Pages High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Misplaced Pages, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's encyclopedic coverage of itself. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page. Please remember to avoid self-references and maintain a neutral point of view, even on topics relating to Misplaced Pages.WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject WikipediaWikipedia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Media Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Media To-do List:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite
NPOV : Content (media and publishing)
Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper
Other :
- Answer requests for comments

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Mid‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Soman, Sandhya (12 January 2014). "Wiki-paid-y a?". Times of India. "My friends were offered hefty salaries to join a political party's campaign recently. They didn't take it up," says the Bangalore–based editor. Another Misplaced Pages writer says he has been saying 'no' every other day to at least two corporates wanting a jazzed up page and offering to pay for it.
Stephen Harrison (14 June 2019). "How Should Misplaced Pages Cover When Brands Manipulate Misplaced Pages?". Slate (magazine). Retrieved 15 June 2019. Curious readers can also read more detail about the incident on the separate Misplaced Pages article for conflict-of-interest editing of Misplaced Pages, where the North Face is included along with other corporations and politicians that have attempted to edit the site for their own purposes.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Conflict of interest editing on Misplaced Pages was copied or moved into List of Misplaced Pages controversies with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Companies have argued for leeway with "ignore all rules"

@SlimVirgin: This text:

Companies have argued for greater leeway in conflict-of-interest editing, citing Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules, a policy, which states: "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore it."

References

"Frequently Asked Questions". WikiExperts. Retrieved 23 February 2014.

was just deleted as unsourced. You last revised it here. Do you have a better source? I wouldn't be surprised if it is true. --David Tornheim (talk) 22:13, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@TeleComNasSprVen: You added the original text here. Do you have a source? --David Tornheim (talk) 22:26, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

David, that edit of mine you linked to was just a light copy edit. I may not have looked at the source. As for the source, it said at the time (February 2014): "Misplaced Pages's de-facto ban on paid editing is universally ignored. In a recent study conducted by the Public Relations Society of America, 40% of PR professionals admitted to having edited Misplaced Pages. It amounts to over a quarter of million of PR pros who take refuge in the Misplaced Pages’s "Ignore All Rules" policy which says: 'If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Misplaced Pages, ignore it.'" I don't know whether source still says that or how it should be interpreted. SarahSV 04:34, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

@SlimVirgin: Thanks for the response. It seems likes something from that quote belongs in the main text--with mention of date. --David Tornheim (talk) 04:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Chiming in since I'm the one who deleted this text. Technically my edit summary used the phrase "poorly sourced", not "unsourced". What I meant was that I don't think that WikiExperts FAQ page is WP:RELIABLE for the purposes of verifying the claim that companies have cited WP:IAR in arguing for greater leeway in COI editing. It's an FAQ page on the website of a company that does paid Misplaced Pages editing - it's going to be coming at the issue with a heavy bias, and it basically falls under WP:SPS. I'd be okay with including the statement if it could be supported by a reliable, independent source. Or the WikiExperts source could potentially be used to support a weaker claim like "WikiExperts, a company that offers paid editing services, despite being banned for undisclosed paid editing, has justified its methods by citing Misplaced Pages:Ignore all rules which says blah blah". But I think that's giving WP:UNDUE weight to a passing comment made by one specific company in an FAQ. Colin M (talk) 15:41, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Parque da guarita pedra sul.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Now NBC on the Weinstein Scandal:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/ronan-farrow-overcame-spies-and-intimidation-to-break-some-of-the-biggest-stories-of-the-me-too-era/2019/10/10/9cc46c9a-eac1-11e9-85c0-85a098e47b37_story.html

"Interestingly, NBC doesn’t dispute one of Farrow’s scoops, a minor one but telling nonetheless. In the wake of the Weinstein imbroglio, he writes, the network hired a “Misplaced Pages whitewasher” to scrub references to the episode from some of its pages, a curious decision for a news organization dedicated to transparency. To this day, there’s no reference to the Weinstein affair under Oppenheim’s Misplaced Pages entry, and only a fleeting one in Lack’s."

Also:

https://www.newsweek.com/nbc-wikipedia-whitewashing-matt-lauer-weinstein-ronan-farrow-1464118

Ocaasi 08:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Where to report companies?

I just got a letter from a company offering to make a Misplaced Pages page for me, stating

We own multiple accounts on Misplaced Pages with page curation and new page reviewer rights, so we can create and moderate pages with almost zero risk of another mod taking it down.

Where do I report companies like this? That should be a section in this article. --WiseWoman (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

@WiseWoman: per our reader focus, we shouldn't link from mainspace to WP-space, but it'd absolutely be a good idea to add a header to this talk page directing there; I'll whip that up. To answer your question, you're looking for Misplaced Pages:COI noticeboard. Sdkb (talk) 22:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

"Paid advoacy" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Paid advoacy. The discussion will occur at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 24#Paid advoacy until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm _Talk 18:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

New Haaretz

Noting that this article makes some comments on the topic in general, may be good for some content. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:24, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiScanner - too many examples?

As above, really. Do we really need three lines of nothing but examples? Couruu (talk) 08:04, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Why not? They're all well sourced and demonstrate the extensive misuse of Misplaced Pages across dozens of industries and corporate/political leaders. Ocaasi 09:11, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I think a sentence like "extensive misuse of Misplaced Pages across dozens of industries and corporate/political leaders" with a few examples would read better than a single comma-separated sentence of 49. The full list can be (and currently isn't) listed in the WikiScanner article. Belbury (talk) 10:47, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury +1 on this. If the entire list needs to remain, I'd vote for moving it to WikiScanner. Couruu (talk) 11:15, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, moving it to Wikiscanner is a nice solution. Ok... let's just keep some examples from the more prominent and diverse names in this article (fewer than 10, but I'll leave it to you!) Ocaasi 12:54, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Sounds like a good plan to me, but it doesn't seem to have gotten done. This isn't my sort of topic area, so I'm not sure I would do it in cases I bollixed something up. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

"WikiProject Integrity" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect WikiProject Integrity has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 11 § WikiProject Integrity until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

"WikiProject Integrity"

We're "tracking", if you will, something called "WikProject Cooperation", but it is defunct. It seems to have been replaced by Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Integrity, but this article no longer has any information about or even mention of it. It presumably did earlier, because in the above-mentioned RfD about the cross-namespace WikiProject Integrity redirect, the nominator linked explicitly to Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages#WikiProject Cooperation and WikiProject Integrity, a heading that has since been renamed (without an anchor for the original name) to #WikiProject Cooperation. I would think that the material should be restored or new material written, so that those with an interest in the CoI stuff know it exists and has taken over (doing whatever it is doing) where WikiProject Cooperation left off. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Request Edit: WhiteHatWiki on Rene Gonzalez

The user below has a request that an edit be made to Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages. That user has an actual or apparent conflict of interest.
The requested edits backlog is low. There are currently 52 requests waiting for review.

Please read the instructions for the parameters used by this template for accepting and declining them, and review the request below and make the edit if it is well sourced, neutral, and follows other Misplaced Pages guidelines and policies.

I have a conflict of interest as an employee of WhiteHatWiki, which was written about on this page. I'd like to request the removal of a serious fabrication on this page.

In the subsection Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages#2020s 2, in the section Conflict-of-interest editing on Misplaced Pages#Miscellaneous, the editor fabricates that a story in The Oregonian says that WhiteHatWiki was hired to edit a page about a city council person in order to justify inclusion of the event on this page.

The story is about whether city funds were properly used by a council member to hire a firm to advise them on how to make request edits on Wikipeda. The story specifies the request edits on the Talk page were made by a staff member of the city council person and it provides a hyperlink to the relevant Talk page, which shows the staff member disclosed they worked with the council member. The story emphatically does not say that WhiteHatWiki was hired to edit the page about the council person. The story goes into detail describing how of 8 edit requests that were submitted by the council staff member, 4 approved by a Misplaced Pages editor reviewing the requests. The council person's staff was also adamant in the article that it was a proper to hire a a consultant to educate their staff on how to combat distortions on Misplaced Pages.

Only the fabrication that WhiteHatWiki was hired to directly edit the council person's page justifies its placement in this section. Every other example in this section is of undisclosed COI editing.

Here is the full text of the article in The Oregonian in a free version: The editor used a citation to a pay-walled version, making it impossible for non-subscribers to find the fabrication.

Please remove:

On August 7, 2024, The Oregonian reported that Rene Gonzalez spent $6,400 of city taxpayer dollars to hire a contractor, WhiteHatWiki, to make edits to the Portland city commissioner's Misplaced Pages page in an effort to "spruce up his profile" as part of his mayoral bid.

Here's what it says in the passages relevant to WhiteHatWiki's involvement:

Gonzalez’s office at City Hall hired a New York-based company in March to develop a handful of requested edits to the Misplaced Pages page and also train a “designee” on the submission process, records obtained by The Oregonian/OregonLive through a public records request show.
The contractor, WhiteHatWiki, ultimately helped craft eight requested edits, confirmed Shah Smith, Gonzalez’s chief of staff. Smith offered a full-throated defense of the city-funded service in a statement Wednesday.
....A Gonzalez staffer submitted the proposed changes to Misplaced Pages on June 25, according to an edit history published on the website and the commissioner’s office. Only four of the eight requested changes were ultimately approved by a volunteer editor who works under the username Rusalkii.

BC1278 (talk) 18:54, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I would be interested to hear the input of user:Graywalls in relation to this request. Axad12 (talk) 20:57, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Auditor's office didn't find wrong doing initially then re-opened the investigation. There's a newer media coverage on this matter since the last time I touched it. I've been meaning to update it. https://www.koin.com/news/portland/gonzalez-wikipedia-spending-investigation-reopens-after-new-information/ is a source I'm considering to use. Just haven't got around to it. I object to removal but my understanding is that Code Name Enterprises dba WhitehatWiki didn't edit it directly, so I think rewording, rather than removal is in order. Graywalls (talk) 21:05, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that's also my impression. Thanks. I would agree that the text is inaccurate on that particular point, but to describe the story as a fabrication is going a bit far. Also, the story clearly warrants inclusion but it could do with some rewording. While we have WhiteHatWiki here, can they confirm that the story has the dollar figure correct? Axad12 (talk) 21:12, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

Wow, four uses of the word "fabrication" seems excessive. Here's the diff for Graywalls' changes to the article in response to this request. tedder (talk) 00:04, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Dixon Kavanaugh, Shane. "Portland Commissioner Rene Gonzalez spent thousands in city funds to polish Misplaced Pages page". OregonLive.com. The Oregonian. Retrieved August 7, 2024.

Categories: