Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

"WP:COIN" redirects here. For the WikiProject on articles about coins, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Numismatics.

Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. (For help, see Wikipedia: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 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: 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-wpwikipedia.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 Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline.
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: Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests Talk:A Time Called You Talk:A&P Talk:Advanced Research and Invention Agency Talk:American Water Works Talk:Florence Ashley Talk:Astex Pharmaceuticals Talk:Avia Solutions Group Talk:Roy Bahat Talk:Bank of Greene County Talk:William Bolcom Talk:BP Talk:Brookfield Properties Talk:Mike Cannon-Brookes Talk:Sukhinder Singh Cassidy Talk:John Challis Talk:Sonia Chang-Díaz Talk:Change Healthcare Talk:Character.ai Talk:Chicago Board Options Exchange Talk:Chime (company) Talk:Citadel Securities Talk:Civic Hall at Union Square Talk:Clearview Federal Credit Union Talk:Cohen Milstein Talk:Aaron Cohen-Gadol Talk:The Culinary Institute of America Talk:Dahua Technology Talk:Dark Castle Entertainment Talk:Paul Devlin (filmmaker) Talk:Discovery Land Company Talk:Dixy Chicken Talk:Ed Dodds Talk:Dowa Holdings Talk:Emergent BioSolutions Talk:End-user license agreement Talk:Energy Capital Partners Talk:ESAB Talk:Ex Libris Group Talk:Scott Farquhar Talk:Fastly Talk:Randy Fine Talk:Anne Finucane Talk:Florida Power & Light Talk:Bryan Fogel Talk:Forecasting Love and Weather Talk:John Freund (business executive) Talk:Bradley Fried Talk:Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media Talk:Judy Genshaft Talk:Geotab Talk:GetYourGuide Talk:GLX Digital Talk:GoDigital Media Group Talk:Colin Goldberg Talk:Rene Gonzalez (politician) Talk:Grail (company) Talk:Green Line (TRAX) Talk:Kenneth C. Griffin Talk:Grove Collaborative Talk:Gulliver Preparatory School Talk:Shashi Gupta Talk:H.B. Fuller Talk:Holly Ham Talk:Arlene Harris (inventor) Talk:Henley & Partners Talk:Heterodox Academy Talk:Eric Hippeau Talk:History of the Jews in Charleston, South Carolina Talk:Index Ventures Talk:Industrious Talk:Institutional Venture Partners Talk:International Churches of Christ Talk:Sultan Al Jaber Talk:Simcha Jacobovici Talk:Valerie Jarrett Talk:Jawaharlal Nehru Cancer Hospital & Research Centre Talk:Jefferson Awards for Public Service Talk:Joe Biden judicial appointment controversies Talk:Edward D. "Ted" Jones Draft talk:Juris Svenne Talk:Amitabh Kant Talk:Jeffrey Katzenberg Talk:KieranTimberlake Talk:King School Talk:King the Land Talk:Dana Klisanin Talk:Karl Lagerfeld Talk:Dion Lee Talk:Jeffrey Leiden Talk:Martin Lewis (financial journalist) Talk:Library of Congress Subject Headings Talk:Robert Luciano Talk:Geoffrey von Maltzahn Talk:Masdar Talk:McCain Institute Talk:Metlifecare Talk:Christos Metskas Talk:Monero Talk:MoneyWeek Talk:Moody Nolan Talk:MP Materials Talk:Netvibes Talk:Neuroscience Research Australia Talk:NextEra Energy Talk:Nondestructive Evaluation 4.0 Talk:Oasis Management Talk:Omaha Steaks Talk:Operating system Talk:Optum Talk:Oregon Public Broadcasting Talk:Karen O'Rourke Talk:Orphan Train Talk:Orphanage Talk:OUTtv (Canadian TV channel) Talk:Joseph C. Papa Talk:Perkins Eastman Talk:Pershing Square Capital Management Talk:Matthew Pittinsky Talk:Plinabulin Talk:Polymarket Talk:Programming language Talk:Alexander Pruss Talk:Pure Storage Talk:Qiagen Talk:Quantitative storytelling Talk:Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Partnership Talk:Revolut Talk:Jarred Rome Talk:Eric Rubin Talk:Roland Rudd Talk:Jay Ruderman Talk:Sartorius AG Talk:Scandia (theme parks) Talk:Schott AG Talk:Joanna Shields, Baroness Shields Talk:Site Number 4 Mnt 85 Talk:Dragan Šolak (businessman) Talk:SoundExchange Talk:Stichting IKEA Foundation Talk:Subway (restaurant) Talk:Sysco Talk:Joseph Tabrikian Talk:TaskUs Talk:Tencent Talk:The Peninsula Hotels Talk:The Red Sleeve Talk:Titmouse, Inc. Talk:Jean-Pascal Tricoire Talk:Maria-Ana Tupan Talk:UK Biobank Talk:Carla Ulbrich Talk:United Launch Alliance Talk:United States Postal Service Talk:Veris Residential Talk:Versapay Talk:Vincit Talk:Dan Wagner Talk:Terry Wahls Talk:Dashun Wang Talk:Washington University Medical Center Talk:Joey Wat Talk:Mark Weisbrot Talk:Thomas Albert Work Talk:Sam Yagan Talk:Zearn Talk:Zero-day vulnerability Talk:Zions Bancorporation

Pedestrian69

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://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?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://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/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)

I just blocked Pedestrian69 for continuing to edit on his apparently conflicted topic past the UPE warning without giving a notice either way. Hopefully this will at least get their attention - David Gerard (talk) 08:50, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

Cassandrajoymusic

• Missy Mazzoli (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Cassandrajoymusic (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

TrueBlueBabe

• Cherdonna Shinatra (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• TrueBlueBabe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

Jim Sikora

• Jim Sikora (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Blottski (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

Miguel A. Martínez

• Miguel A. Martínez (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Autodesplanifica (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

Hmm thanks to @Melcous for querying a few things. I'm not convinced by Autodesplanifica's answer "I just like his work, which I find notable" since Miguel A. Martínez's website links to his twitter which is ... Autodesplan. What a coincidence! Mujinga (talk) 13:30, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Maximilian Janisch

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)

For the record I will put some more background information here:

• The article was tagged by User:Aszx5000 within WP:NPP, after it was created through translation of the German article by me.
• I have added a COI box to my user page and the article talk page (in the latter I provide evidence that I am the subject of the article).
• More information and the steps I suggested to alleviate the issue of me being a COI editor can be found at the article talk page.

--Maximilian Janisch (talk) 10:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Grüezi Maximilian. I don't know how it is on dewiki, but enwiki policy strongly discourages autobiographies like this one. It's good that you disclosed your COI, but you seem to have overlooked the other parts of that guideline: that you should only propose new articles for review via AfC, and once the article is in mainspace you should not edit it directly. You note on the article talk page that 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)

Thank you for the useful information @Joe Roe: While you are right that the path to creation for this article was inappropriate due to mistakes on my part, I have nonetheless argued for why I believe deletion is not the right response over at the article deletion page. I agree that the article creation process is unfortunate but I still believe the decision of whether the article is deleted should be based on the article itself and associated guidelines, not the process through which it was created. In any case I will make sure to be more careful with COI editing in the future and I apologize for this inconvenience caused by me not having proposed the article via WP:AfC. --Maximilian Janisch (talk) 11:21, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

Debra Fischer

• Debra Fischer (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Debrafischer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy

• University of Rhode Island College of Pharmacy (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• URI student worker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

I've soft blocked the username - it's not specific to an individual, student worker is a role. Secretlondon (talk) 12:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

User:Dssep

• Kabhi Main Kabhi Tum (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Dssep (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:44, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

• As I Remove the Multiple issues template in Kabhi Main Kabhi Tum because the The Express Tribune, Dawn (newspaper), ARY News, Dunya News, Aaj News, The Indian Express and the many more references are Reliable as their articles are also on Wikipedia. None of these are not the Paid websites as they are internationally recognized News Websites. Another thing is that the article is not Paid with no promotional words or the article is written. The article is also notable as The Fahad Mustafa, Hania Aamir, Emmad Irfani, Javed Sheikh, Bushra Ansari are the leading actors on domestic and International level. The series is not yet released so it is a stub article also as i Add the stub template and the article is improving as the new News arrives. Also You mention me here, I'm not a Paid editor. The article is written in Neutral Point of View. Other Administrators can Check the article that it is a Piad Contributions ? If there are any issues discussed on the Article Talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dssep (talk • contribs) 07:51, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
  • @Ivanvector: Despite this report, @Dssep, continues to move drafts to the main NS and engage in page move war. Allan Nonymous draftified the article but then reverted it back. Similarly, they redirecting declined drafts such as Draft:UmroAyyar A New Beginning (Diff 1231670989) and Draft:Umro Ayyar - A New Beginning (Diff 1231671391). This behavior resembles what Nauman335 sock farm typically does. — Saqib (talk I contribs) 16:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
    • Dssep is  Confirmed to Nauman335. Hypothetically007 is technically  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) as they are using a proxy, but exhibits a technical signature matching data reported in this case in the past. Since they are very obviously working together, both are blocked indefinitely. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
      • Ivanvector, Thanks, but if they were not blocked for socking, would this editing behavior alone be enough to get them blocked? — Saqib (talk I contribs) 06:29, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
        • @Saqib: well, they are blocked for socking, but if you're referring to the behaviour of persistently moving draftified articles back to mainspace, I've been told through a few different approaches that it isn't, for reasons essentially boiling down to encouraging bold editing and assuming good faith. Consensus seems to be that if you draftify an article and the author moves it back without making any improvements, send the article to AFD. And if it's a new editor with an article on one of these Hum TV or Geo TV or ARY Digital television shows, report them in the Nauman335 case, it's nearly 100% at this point. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 12:30, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

What You Wish For

• What You Wish For (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• BlairThimper73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

Please read the talk page on the page, everything is laid out there. BlairThimper73 (talk) 16:41, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

(AFC reviewer and involved editor) @BlairThimper73 despite being warned for your interest, you kept asking proof of COI, while I placed the COI tag with proof. All the time you never tried to understand what is Conflict of Interest. Editor Jdcomix brought the issue here after seeing the page history and the talk page. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:34, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry but I don't see any COI. What is COI on the page as it stands currently? There is none. The page has almost zero contribution from me now, and what I did initially contribute was just inforamtion. But like I have said, the COI will stand because you want it to. This is not my problem, it is a public resource, not a private forum for your opinion. BlairThimper73 (talk) 00:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@BlairThimper73 this is Wikipedia, not your film. Your above statement is inability to understand what is being said and against good behaviour. You seem to be a single purpose account to create or edit your films only. Twinkle1990 (talk) 14:54, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Emmanuel Samba Zumakpeh

• Emmanuel Samba Zumakpeh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Josiah Nterful (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

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)

Vitaliy Khomutynnik

• Vitaliy Khomutynnik (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• KaterynaS (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• TemPot Pee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Dlimali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Jenes (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Vitaliy Khomutynnik's article has attracted COI/UPEs in the past to white wash his biography and they were blocked for violations. Now, a user with just 298 edits (User:Jenes) has whitewashed the article again from this to this. One of the sock even disclosed the payment status. Can we investigate/revert this obvious sock? More eyes the better. 86.97.145.183 (talk) 21:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the edit on Vitaliy Khomutynnik's page in a wider field than the discussion page. The first thing I want to pay attention to is that the main language section for me is Ukrainian. I have less experience in editing English section because of my not quite perfect English.

Therefore, I don’t edit separate sections, but update (create) pages that I wrote (or substantially revised) in the Ukrainian section. This is exactly the situation with the Khomutynnik’s page. Before my edition this page looked like a list of separate facts and I built a structured text from these facts and wrote an article.

How does the user’s Bexaendos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) edit look like? Rearrangement of text blocks (of course this is a matter of taste, but why it was necessary to do it in a newly rewritten article?) and addition of facts that do not stand the test of time, and which, according to this logic, were removed from the updated version. It is about the Inauguration of Donald Trump, which took place in 2017.

If Bexaendos user considers this fact significant for the biography, then perhaps it would be worthwhile to start a separate section with a list of all the protocol events in which Khomutynnik participated. Or, at least, he should also edit the corresponding Inauguration of Donald Trump article and start with the formation of a complete list of the participants of the ceremony (if the editors consider the addition of such names appropriate). Jenes (talk) 08:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Centre for Voters Initiative & Action (CVIA)

• Draft:Centre for Voters Initiative & Action (CVIA) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Samadquraishi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This is a blatent COI article, and this user has already been banned from editing an article created on him. OnlyNano^talk 21:53, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Marco Camisani Calzolari

One of the creators of this new BLP (which I tagged while patrolling) has helpfully declared that they are a paid editor. Am I right in assuming that such an article should be moved to WP:AFC? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 08:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The Hidden World of Wikipedia Page Creation Services

"This is where Maximatic Media's expertise comes into play, crafting pages that not only go live but remain intact against the scrutiny of Wikipedia's dedicated community of editors and administrators."

For the interested. Sadly, the writer never asked about if they follow WP:PAID. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I'd go even further and say it's downright malpractice to write a whole article about undisclosed paid editing and not mention that it is banned. Maximatic Media doesn't disclose their username where they advertise their services and therefore are violating Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure#Disclosures to clients. But WP:RSP#Entrepreneur tells me that this is a self-published content mill, so it's probably no use trying to get it corrected. – Joe (talk) 12:52, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Well you know, there's that delicate balance between doing stuff they can get paid for and other stuff. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I don't know if this outfit 'Maximatic Media' is already on our radar. It's not on WP:PAIDLIST and I couldn't find any previous discussion of it, but they might just have changed their name. A Newbie-Friendly Guide to Creating and Self-Publishing Your Own Wikipedia Page claims they are "a somewhat renown [sic] Wikipedia editor" and implies they have access to an account that's "been around for 7+ years and has made 3,000+ edits across various existing pages alongside the 300+ pages they've created and published themselves". Of course, they all say that, but the actually-quite-good knowledge of our policies and how to circumvent them on display in that article suggests it might not be total bullshit this time. – Joe (talk) 13:39, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The article includes a disclaimer at the top that Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own and also that You're reading Entrepreneur India, an international franchise of Entrepreneur Media. That this would be a sort of paid news piece doesn't seem to be all that surprising, and editorial standards regarding paid news tend to be quite low; this piece is somewhat indistinguishable from an ad. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, Maximatic Media list this as one of the sites that clients can pay to be published in. I would be unsurpised if they felt that something good for their clients may well be good for them. - Bilby (talk) 13:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

I see UPEs making high quality BLPs (+30 refs, photo, full MOS-editing), but where the refs are primary/speaker bios/obscure publications etc., and ultimately the main source of their notability is their Wikipedia blp (e.g. like Ian Khan (theoretical futurist)). We should have a WP:ACRONYM for such cases (e.g. WP:WIKINOTABILITY or WP:CARTBEFORETHEHORSE). Aszx5000 (talk) 14:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

See this super-gross Rolling Stone UK piece with a tiny disclaimer at the bottom "Stream Publishing not involved in this content" i.e. it's churnalism under their name. Of course, reputation management is Maximatic's business; their Wikipedia page creation service is listed under the wonderful sub-heading "Mastering Online Reputation Management". ☆ Bri (talk) 17:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

So band spam? Secretlondon (talk) 17:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Band spam, but since it comes from a Rolling Stone url and the thing that lets us tell that it is sponsored content appears at the bottom, it might be a bit more likely to slip through the cracks at AfC or NPP. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

• I've had no luck trying to tie this company to any on-wiki activity. I think it speaks to the evolving tactics of UPE operations. They know that it's very difficult to slip non-notable subjects by NPP, so they focus on manufacturing (pseudo-)SIGCOV through paid placements first. They know that running your own sockfarm isn't sustainable, so they focus on—unfortunately there is no escaping this now—getting accounts with the NPP flag so that they can mark reviewed articles created by one-off freelancers. It's a challenge. – Joe (talk) 08:18, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

  If that's the way that the game has changed, perhaps an audit of NPP review actions by trusted users might be worthwhile? Could even be done on a sample basis, but it should help to catch/mitigate some of that. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 16:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah we already do that. There are 800 NPPers doing several thousand reviews a day though. It's a crapshoot. – Joe (talk) 20:23, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Yousuf Bhailok

• Yousuf Bhailok (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Salman00faris (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

To quote edit summaries I am his assistant. I have updated more about him and This is the real version for yousuf Bhailok. I am his election campaign manager, both left while turning the article into a hagiography. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 18:06, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The slur by association in that article is terrible and certainly was correctly removed. Secretlondon (talk) 18:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

IE the controversy section which is all about someone else. Secretlondon (talk) 18:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. I hesitated to remove it entirely due to it being sourced (people get weird when an IP removes sourced information, even when it's as terrible as that para was) and am happy that it now has been. The hagiography that replaced the entire article a few edits earlier is now something to watch for in case it returns, in my opinion. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Secretlondon (talk) 18:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Marathon Asset Management

• Marathon Asset Management (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• DetroitFinanceAnalyst (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has been adding advertising (or at least very spammy Title Case Industry Jargon) to this article. No communication; reversal is met with instant reversion. Coming here to avoid 3RR issues. 81.187.192.168 (talk) 20:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I will note that the user has not edited since they were warned about our undisclosed paid editing policy. None of the user's contributions remain in the article. Please ping me if the user edits again, or if there is any additional sort of promotional fluff coming from new accounts to that article. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Zang Toi

• Zang Toi (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• ZANGTOI (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User has edited an article that is apparently about themself despite a prior warning about a potential conflict of interest. Jdcomix (talk) 15:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

UPE - Message from Simple English Wiki

• Nuel Jr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I received a message on my talk page on Simple English Wikipedia which led to this discussion also on Simple English Wikipedia about user Nuel Jr. Copying information here for those interested and notified the person who pinged me to email evidence to paid-en-wp@wikipedia.org. CNMall41 (talk) 21:11, 4 July 2024 (UTC)