| Revision as of 15:24, 30 June 2012 editNenpog (talk | contribs)453 edits →Adverse effects to CT← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 10:30, 19 August 2024 edit undoMusikBot II (talk | contribs)Bots, Interface administrators, Administrators102,819 editsm Removing protection templates from unprotected page (more info)Tag: Manual revert | ||
| (870 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ⚫ | {{NOINDEX}} | ||
| {{notice|This is the ] for the ]. Issues related to ] should go to the noticeboard, not to this talk page. This talk page is for discussing issues relating to ''the noticeboard itself''.}} | {{notice|This is the ] for the ]. Issues related to ] should go to the noticeboard, not to this talk page. This talk page is for discussing issues relating to ''the noticeboard itself''.}} | ||
| {{shortcut|WT:COI/N|WT:COIN}} | {{shortcut|WT:COI/N|WT:COIN}} | ||
| ⚫ | <center>] ''''''</ |
||
| ⚫ | {{archives|search=yes}} | ||
| {{oldmfdfull|date=2008-02-11|result='''keep'''}} | {{oldmfdfull|date=2008-02-11|result='''keep'''}} | ||
| {{oldmfd | date = 2010-09-13 | result = '''] keep''' | votepage = Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (2nd nomination)}} | {{oldmfd | date = 2010-09-13 | result = '''] keep''' | votepage = Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard (2nd nomination)}} | ||
| {{User:MiszaBot/config | |||
| |archiveheader = {{aan}} | |||
| |maxarchivesize = 100K | |||
| |counter = 8 | |||
| |minthreadsleft = 6 | |||
| |minthreadstoarchive = 1 | |||
| |algo = old(60d) | |||
| |archive = Misplaced Pages talk:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive %(counter)d | |||
| }} | |||
| ⚫ | {{NOINDEX}} | ||
| ⚫ | {{archives|search=yes}} | ||
| ⚫ | <div class="center">] ''''''</div> | ||
| ⚫ | == Runza == | ||
| Hello. I am seeing a probable COI edit on an article that I'm watching, ], . 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 ]. Thanks. <span style="font-family: cursive;">— ]<small><sup> (])</sup></small></span> 14:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC) | |||
| :Thank you. <span style="font-family: cursive;">— ]<small><sup> (])</sup></small></span> 17:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC) | |||
| :]Midwestern ] (]) 05:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Does anyone know what happened with Saudi Arabia trying to edit Misplaced Pages? == | |||
| == COIN Cleanup == | |||
| 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? ] (]) 15:45, 17 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
| I have attempted to address as many outstanding reports as possible. I have marked several as either resolved or stale (in my opinion, the line between the two is very thin). If you get a chance, please take a look at them and make a note if you think I have closed those cases in error. If there are no objections, I will archive those reports in the next day or two as I feel that all the clutter may be discouraging people from getting involved. ''']'''<sup>]</font></sup> 21:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :This board is for discussion about the operation of the COI noticeboard. Requests for help should be made at the ]. ] (]) 18:48, 17 April 2023 (UTC) | |||
| == Presentation on COI == | |||
| :I have archived several resolved/stale sections. ''']'''<sup>]</font></sup> 16:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| 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. | |||
| == Template:COI == | |||
| 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: ]. I've asked ] 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 ], which is UTC+12:00. for your convenience. ''']]''' 20:32, 25 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
| The {{tl|COI}} tag is nominated for deletion, see ''']'''. ] (]) 08:35, 12 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :Here's a ; 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". ''']]''' 05:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC) | |||
| == Edit notice == | |||
| == Discussion of potential interest == | |||
| I find that some users often come to this noticeboard and accuse another user of having a ] but present no evidence (unless the user's name clearly indicated a conflict per ]). Before requesting a change to the edit notice of the noticeboard, I would like to see what others think about this issue. More exactly, is it ] or in ] to accuse someone at a noticeboard like this without presenting any evidence? Outside of civility, it doubles the work done assuming the person making the report did any research into the COI. | |||
| Maybe it's something we can't change or isn't worth trying to change but I'm more interested in what others think about the issue of civility at this point. ''']'''<sup>]</font></sup> 16:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
| Editors who read this noticeboard may be interested in the discussion at ], regarding how to best obtain a random sample of Misplaced Pages articles on companies for the purposes of assessing problems like undisclosed COI editing. – ]''']''' ] 16:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :It's not this noticeboard alone. Some users in content disputes make accusations of sockpuppetry, or whatever else will (if believed) get their opponent blocked from Misplaced Pages or at least sanctioned from editing on the topic. If you can get someone kicked out, you needn't persuade him nor risk his winning an argument. Not a new idea in the world, is it? --] (]) 22:27, 21 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Unclear starter-template output == | |||
| ::You're absolutely right. I'm not naive enough to think that we live in a fair world but that doesn't mean we can't strive for a fair world in our little corner of it. ''']'''<sup>]</font></sup> 00:11, 22 April 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :If the discussion merely is an accusuation of COI without evidence, consider closing the discussion by adding <br>''<nowiki>{{Discussion top|1=Closed by -- ~~~~}}</nowiki>''<br> to the discussion top and <br>''<nowiki>{{Discussion bottom}}</nowiki>''<br> to the bottom of the discussion. -- ] (]) 11:31, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| ::I've always been weary of doing a hard close like that. I'm not opposed to it though. I'll consider using that method in the future. ''']'''<sup>]</font></sup> 23:39, 8 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| :::It's hard to know in advance where a discussion will head. When it reaches time for a hard close, the damage already might be done. -- ] (]) 06:09, 9 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| *We absolutely need a new approach. discussion has been going on for 22 daysand any COI evidence has long since been presented and reviewed. COIN doesn't have anything set up to close such discussions. Seems that the COIN board will continue to be used until Toresbe is driven from the project. That isn't right. -- ] (]) 10:07, 30 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| When filing a new COI report using the "To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:" item, the user is given ] as the skeleton. It has bullet-entries: | |||
| ⚫ | == |
||
| {{box| | |||
| * <nowiki>{{pagelinks|article name}}</nowiki> | |||
| * <nowiki>{{userlinks|username}}</nowiki> | |||
| }} | |||
| Those seem pretty clear to the filer how and where to enter the relevant details. But the results of those templates when published are: | |||
| {{box| | |||
| * {{pagelinks|article name}} | |||
| * {{userlinks|username}} | |||
| }} | |||
| The outputs are very similar, but the concepts are quite different. Unless I recognize the differential link-sets, or the article name and username themselves, it's not clear which entry is for an article and which is for the involved user. Articles could be named for a person and editors could have non-person names, and there are cases where unrelated users have the same username as articles. I think it would be clearer if either each bullet-entry were tagged with what it is: | |||
| {{box| | |||
| * Article: {{pagelinks|article name}} | |||
| * User: {{userlinks|username}} | |||
| }} | |||
| or the article(s) vs user(s) were in separately-identified lists: | |||
| {{box| | |||
| * Article(s): | |||
| ** {{pagelinks|article name}} | |||
| * User(s): | |||
| ** {{userlinks|username}} | |||
| }} | |||
| I am only an occasional user of COIN, which makes this unclarity more noticeable to me but I also don't want to BOLDly change a tool that regulars might be expected to be a certain way. Thoughts? ] (]) 18:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :Sounds like a reasonable improvement to me. (I also have the nagging half-memory that there are other noticeboards that use a similar format that might also be improved in the same way...) ] (]) 18:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| Should the {{tl|seealso}} tag on the top of this noticeboard be changed? For example: | |||
| ::Preference among the two approaches? Either one completely solves my concern, so I don't have a preference. I can see pros and cons of both, in terms of readability, compactness, consistency with other notice-boards, etc. ] (]) 19:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC) | |||
| :{{seealso|Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Cooperation|Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Paid Advocacy Watch}} | |||
| Cheers. -- ] ] ] 19:52, 25 May 2012 (UTC) | |||
| == Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2024 == | |||
| == Adverse effects to CT == | |||
| <!-- Do not change this line. Your report should go below this line. --> | |||
| According to the header of the COIN: "This page is for reporting or <b>requesting advice</b> regarding conflict of interest (COI) incidents." | |||
| * {{pagelinks|Jake Braun}} | |||
| * {{userlinks|97.119.137.18}} | |||
| <!-- Copy and use the templates above if there are more users or articles. --> | |||
| This article was tagged with ] because of extensive edits by the subject. The subject attempted to remove the tag and had their account blocked indefinitely. See the COI noticeboard discussion at and the user discussion at ]. An IP address user has again attempted to remove the tag. | |||
| <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 00:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)</small> | |||
| I think that COIs may be involved in the edits of adverse effects to CT. I have opened the discussion at the COIN in order to discuss the matter but the discussion was closed. No advice was given. Please advice. --] (]) 15:21, 30 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 10:30, 19 August 2024
 | This is the talk page for the Conflict of interest noticeboard. Issues related to conflict of interest should go to the noticeboard, not to this talk page. This talk page is for discussing issues relating to the noticeboard itself. |
 | This page was nominated for deletion on 2008-02-11. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This page was nominated for deletion on 2010-09-13. The result of the discussion was snowball keep. |
 Archives | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 6 sections are present. |
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 14:40, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you. — Mudwater 17:08, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
- @@Midwestern 89.199.101.252 (talk) 05:30, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Does anyone know what happened with Saudi Arabia trying to edit Misplaced Pages?
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: Misplaced Pages: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)
Discussion of potential interest
Editors who read this noticeboard may be interested in the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Performing a random pages test on business articles, regarding how to best obtain a random sample of Misplaced Pages articles on companies for the purposes of assessing problems like undisclosed COI editing. – Teratix ₵ 16:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Unclear starter-template output
When filing a new COI report using the "To begin a new discussion, enter the name of the relevant article below:" item, the user is given Misplaced Pages:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Template as the skeleton. It has bullet-entries:
- {{pagelinks|article name}}
- {{userlinks|username}}
Those seem pretty clear to the filer how and where to enter the relevant details. But the results of those templates when published are:
- Article name (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
The outputs are very similar, but the concepts are quite different. Unless I recognize the differential link-sets, or the article name and username themselves, it's not clear which entry is for an article and which is for the involved user. Articles could be named for a person and editors could have non-person names, and there are cases where unrelated users have the same username as articles. I think it would be clearer if either each bullet-entry were tagged with what it is:
- Article: Article name (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- User: username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
or the article(s) vs user(s) were in separately-identified lists:
- Article(s):
- User(s):
- username (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
I am only an occasional user of COIN, which makes this unclarity more noticeable to me but I also don't want to BOLDly change a tool that regulars might be expected to be a certain way. Thoughts? DMacks (talk) 18:09, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like a reasonable improvement to me. (I also have the nagging half-memory that there are other noticeboards that use a similar format that might also be improved in the same way...) ElKevbo (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Preference among the two approaches? Either one completely solves my concern, so I don't have a preference. I can see pros and cons of both, in terms of readability, compactness, consistency with other notice-boards, etc. DMacks (talk) 19:51, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2024
- Jake Braun (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- 97.119.137.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
This article was tagged with Misplaced Pages:Autobiography because of extensive edits by the subject. The subject attempted to remove the tag and had their account blocked indefinitely. See the COI noticeboard discussion at Cambridge Global and Jake Braun and the user discussion at User_talk:Spartaneditor. An IP address user has again attempted to remove the tag.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.15.211.66 (talk) 00:52, 6 August 2024 (UTC)