Hello! I am having a discussion with @Discussthis on the talk page about which version of this article is preferable:Special:Permalink/1281531495 (possibly with some edits), which I accepted based on a draft by @Gadgetgyal, who is the subject of the article and has declared her COI on the talk page, or the current versionSpecial:Permalink/1285544028, to which Discussthis revert the article due to it being a "PR update". I'm bring this here because (1) the discussion is about a COI edit request and (2) Discussthis believes that I have an undeclared COI here. I do not, but I am happy to leave this decision to any uninvolved editors that want to take a look.Rusalkii (talk)07:12, 15 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Would probably be helpful to have someone else weigh in here. My opinion is that @Rusalkii is taking this very personally, hence my COI suspicion. If we just look at the facts: anyone who has the money to can hire a publicist, who will then target ameneable journalists to publish whatever their client wants. We know this. Some claims in this article update are unsourced, some are sourced and yet when you check sources they are just the article subjects reported statements - these are not investigative journalist pieces but fluff PR. As an example, there is a claim about how much a company sold for yet no proof of this, no financial records, there's no evidence of anything. This is a matter of integrity and the ways in which Wikipedia is utilised for personal gain at the expsense of truth. If you personally knew the article subject or had a vested interest in them then it might feel unfair, otherwise it's an objcetive call.Discussthis (talk)18:36, 15 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I got a ping here, but am unsure any input from me is needed/helpful. I (Gadgetgyal) am the article-subject. User Rusalkii is an impartial editor with no affiliation to me. Discussthis has not disclosed a COI, but their edits are exclusively focused on deleting content about me[1]? If there is any way I can be of assistance, please let me know.Gadgetgyal (talk)19:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

The ping was an FYI, you're welcome to comment but it's not at all necessary here.Rusalkii (talk)19:46, 24 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

There's room to critique Gadgetgyal's proposed changes, but I really don't see anything here or atTalk:Amber Atherton that suggests that Rusalkii is taking this personally or behaving out of order. On the other hand, Discussthis has steadily amped up accusations of ulterior motives without really providing anything to back it up. It's frankly silly to see an editor who has made 19 edits over 1.5 years, all to the single article in question, accuse an editor with over 30,000 edits to a wide range of articles of having a conflict of interest with that topic._signed,Rosguill^talk19:39, 24 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I am not particularly concerned about the COI allegations here, I'd just like a second look at the proposed change and for someone to weigh in on whether they think it's better to reinstateSpecial:Permalink/1281531495 over the current content.Rusalkii (talk)19:46, 24 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

You might want to look at previous articles versions of Silicon Valley grifters who have since been convicted of fraud. Would you have been happy to support their unverifiable claims? Statements of fact with good sources, ideally multiple trustworthy sources, are the hallmarks of a trustworthy article.Discussthis (talk)01:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

My impression is that the revision you ok’d is mostly fine, with a few bits here and there that could be reigned in: the “angel investor” descriptor seems unwarranted, and the material cited solely to citation #2 is perhaps not DUE._signed,Rosguill^talk16:19, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Lisa Feret (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• 165.127.14.3 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

There wasa previous discussion about this in 2021, and it seems the same thing is still happening four years later.165.127.14.3 is an IP registered to the "State of Colorado General Government", and despite several warnings and apparent knowledge of how to use talk pages, is still editing COI pages:Colorado State Capitol,Alex Valdez (removing informationcritical of him), andLisa Feret (adding several thousand bytes ofpromotional and badly sourced information).

Is there a reason this IP wasn't blocked the first time? Almost all of its edits have been to politics-related pages, and IP seems to have no intention of stopping or responding to warnings.Iiii I I I (talk)04:58, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

(Pinging previously involved editors in case you're interested:@Mathmitch7,Melcous,Jon698, andSeraphimblade.)Iiii I I I (talk)05:02, 19 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

diff review:

• 16 April 2025: uncited claims
• 18 February 2025: promotionalpuffery and over-reliance on primary sources
• 30 January 2024:"... are you working on a page forour new state rep Chad Cliffordwe want to know more about him ..." coi implication
• 4 May 2023: unexplained removal of cited information that reflects poorly on subject
• 11 May 2021: addition of uncited information about multiple living persons
• 23 April 2019: addition of uncited, and possibly undue, information

near all of their edits are in the stated political space, many are minor uncontroversial changes; however, when issues do arise acoi appears to be a contributing factor and attempts tocommunicate these problems are unsuccessful. might be worth consideringani, but since this is an ip and the problematic edits are sparse i'm not sure what kind of outcome that'd bring.fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk)02:50, 20 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you very much for tagging me here, I'm glad to continue the discussion. I highly recommend editors look at theprevious discussion as I had previously identified over 40 affected articles and 5 IP addresses, all of which belong to Colorado government computers. I think further investigation of similar addresses would also be a good idea, eg, anything in the 165.127.14.X range.

I am in favor of blocking particularly bad individual addresses like the one in this report. This is surely preferable to a range block.

I am considering filing a report with the Colorado Office of Legislative Workplace Relations, as per the leg'sWorkplace Expectations Policy. I do not know what the legislature's IT department's abuse policy is like, or how to contact them. However, it seems filing a complaint with the organization directly is a good idea, as they surely have more ability to stop this than we do. This is one of the courses of action advised onWikipedia:Blocking IP addresses. - -mathmitch7^{(talk/contribs)}16:44, 21 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I have now sent an email to the Colorado Office of Legislative Workplace Relations (OWLR). You can find a copy of that email here:User:Mathmitch7/2025-04-29 Complaint to Colorado OLWR. - -mathmitch7^{(talk/contribs)}22:49, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Update: my complaint has been forwarded to the CO Legislature's IT department leadership. I've updated the post in my userspace (User:Mathmitch7/2025-04-29 Complaint to Colorado OLWR) with our conversation. Other editors, please feel free to continue to update this COIN entry with related instances of vandalism should you find it. - -mathmitch7^{(talk/contribs)}23:55, 2 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

User:165.127.14.3 atLisa Feret again.

18:56, 2 May 2025 - 20:05, 2 May 2025: removed sourced paragraphs about how"feret has advocated for a comprehensive approach to crime prevention" and"she supports a wide range of policies to address housing shortages including expanding supportive housing", while adding in a couple small primary-sourced reputational boosters like"Feret worked on several bills promoting child safety and protection" and"Feret passed a bill to add protections for veterans seeking benefits."

Looks like political reputation management to me, especially with the coi concerns: The people no longer agree with the "mental health co-response model" and sending officers in response to "individuals experiencing homelessness"? Just snip it out.fifteen thousand two hundred twenty four (talk)08:13, 3 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• NewsBreak (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• 137.83.96.24 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

I am unsure if there is anything that can (or needs to be) done but wanted to put this here to have more eyes on it. This IP editor made a series of edits to the article that are in line with the statement NewsBreak sent toNewsguard.

They removed most (if not all) of the negative information, again in line with the talking points from that letter, and made claims that aren't supported by their edits in their edit summaries (e.g.There is no mention of page topic within the cited article. Wikipedia is meant to be neutral in tone, that is not.) despite the source saying exactly what they removed.

Given the subject of the article, it was quite concerning to see.i know you're a dog (talk)00:02, 27 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Iposted this here, but figured it would be helpful to copy/paste onto this thread as well:

• User removed info about harm done by the company.

• Letter says "We have a zero-tolerance policy towards harmful content."

• User removed pink-slime category and changed "erroneous stories" to "legal matters"

• Letter says "Third parties on NewsBreak are held accountable for serious violations of our community standards. For example, contributors on NewsBreak are held accountable through a strike system designed to address serious violations of our community standards. Under this system, Contributors are issued strikes for each infraction, with the third strike resulting in the termination of their account."

• User added info from dubious source about robust editorial process

• Letter says "NewsBreak’s moderation team will conduct a review and subsequently remove the content for violating our terms."

• User removed pink-slime (which is computer generated faux-local news aggregation)

• Letter says "There may be instances where third parties have utilized AI to generate their content without including a disclaimer." and about another incident "it’s important to note that the error was not caused by AI."

• User added cite about their American investor

• Letter says "NewsBreak is an American technology company" despite one of their investors being placed on aUS DOD list of companies thatwork with the Chinese Military

i know you're a dog (talk)07:31, 27 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Without weighing in on the rest of the above, I removed the pink slime mention around an hour ago. The sourcing that was in place relied on a blog post of a library and was aWP:NOTRS source; for what seems to be a contentious way to frame a company it should have a higher quality source. I attempted to find a better secondary source to replace it with rather than outright removing but was unable to find anything.

Awshort (talk)08:15, 27 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Nonso Okpala (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Niyi Adenubi (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• VFD Microfinance Bank (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• SimplyRukky (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• Tobeaninyei (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

The user has created the above two biographies of the founders of the company page. On their talk page, they claim that they are a freelance writer taking payment for work, but not for their work on Wikipedia, see their responses to the PAID warning givenin March. They are also responsible for adding text praising one of the founders to the company page inthis edit. —‍Bobby Cohn (talk)16:29, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've expanded this to the second editor after again realizing that SimplyRukky has picked up exactly where the other editor left off in the drafts, moving both of them despite being created by the former. This user is responsible for the upload of company pictures to the commons on both subjects and the company from the company's website, seecommons:User talk:Tobeaninyei as it relates to the following now deleted files there:

• commons:File:Nonso Okpala.jpg
• commons:File:Portrait of Adeniyi Adenubi, Executive Director, VFD Group Plc.jpg
• commons:File:Niyi ade.jpg
• commons:File:VFD Group Chairman - Nonso Okpala.jpg

Thanks,Bobby Cohn (talk)16:36, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Palm cooling (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Performance science (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

As can be seen in this diff linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palm_cooling&diff=prev&oldid=1287084651 this article has been edited to include a link to the company website as a reference, and the nature of the edits use language that suggest a lack of neutrality. These links go against Wikipedia's suggestions of links that should be avoided, and the author of these edits appears to be acting in an advertising self-interest not in an unbiased capacity. For instance, the mention of a successful crowdfunding campaign seems promotional in nature and not relevant to the article. I have raised these concerns on the user's talk page and waited a reasonable time for a rectification or response, but with no response.Strict1y (talk)16:49, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I've corrected the heading and added the page and user links above. There wasan issue with this page a year and a half ago, but apparently with a different user. --Pemilligan (talk)19:35, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for making those corrections!Strict1y (talk)22:07, 2 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Pretty standard drive-by advertising. I've cleaned a bunch of it out of the article. If you see anything like this again feel free to just remove the offending material.MrOllie (talk)22:43, 2 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• J-P Conte (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• MadelaineHS (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• MadelaineHanson (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• Thelmoine (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

Looks like a textbook COI situation but it would be good to get other eyes on this.Amigao (talk)22:32, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

If you Google the names, you can see a clear trail. Trying to do some cleanup but would be better to strip it to a stub and rebuild in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk)23:34, 28 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Was just trying to clear up some sources, apologies. Definitely went into full resume territory. Please don't delete it, I'll stand back and won't make any edits. Didn't realize I was being so impartial, seems obvious now. Thanks!Thelmoine (talk)01:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Socialio86 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

Anyone looking into this might be interested to see this user, who coincidentally uses the same words onTalk:J-P Conte as the other account in the edit summary ofthis diff despite claiming to be another user. They have entered the AfD discussion regarding the mentioned article.MediaKyle (talk)02:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

I do not want to be involved inWP:OUTING so I will not post the link, but this is 100%WP:UPE. Some of the references are also going to be paid for. --CNMall41 (talk)02:38, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yes, I just saw that. This is really bad. This should be brought to someone's attention.MediaKyle (talk)02:39, 29 April 2025 (UTC)tReply

I usedcheckuser andSocialio86,MadelaineHS, andThelmoine are  Confirmed to each other.MadelaineHanson is  Stale but also aWP:DUCK. All of them blocked.PhilKnight (talk)03:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

If anything, the company name and editor name found in Google search should be added toWikipedia:List of paid editing companies. --CNMall41 (talk)16:10, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

An update on this situation: Following some investigation based on the above, I have identified the following articles which have a high likelihood of being linked to this UPE effort:

I've omitted some articles which have already been fixed since I tagged them. These remaining articles will require greater scrutiny, and a few of them can likely be sent to AfD.MediaKyle (talk)22:34, 30 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Trelagliptin (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Zh8109 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

Zh8109 is edit-warring to add promotional material toTrelagliptin despite multiple warnings and reverts from multiple users.Jay8g[V•T•E]07:06, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

• NordVPN (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• SpaghetticodeV (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• Putongpengyou (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• BettinoD (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• KnownStormChaser (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

TheNordVPN article has recently received a string ofpromotional edits that I suspect may beundisclosed paid editing:

• 4 April: SpaghetticodeV citeda highly promotional post with affiliate links to NordVPN and acall to action on the blog "Insider Gaming"
• 9 April: Putongpengyou citeda highly promotional review with affiliate links to NordVPN and a call to action on the product comparison site "Comparitech". The content included the ad-like text"boosting its claim to be the most advanced VPN app on the market" and text with thetrademark symbol, i.e."Threat Protection Pro™".
• 28 April: BettinoD added a list of "awards" from sites containing affiliate links to NordVPN and cited NordVPN marketing pages such as"Get our Emergency VPN Assistance for FREE".
• 29 April: KnownStormChaser obscured NordVPN's Lithuanian origins to claim that NordVPN is Panamanian, citinga NordVPN support page that presents the Panama jurisdiction as a security benefit.

This editing pattern from newly registered accounts gives me the impression that the promotional article changes are coordinated. I've tagged the article as{{Promotional}} and{{Undisclosed paid}} while this article is being cleaned up. — Newslinger talk09:54, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Newslinger: At the top of this page is the requirement:

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.

Did you do that? A cursory look at each of the relevant user talk pages shows no such discussion. Did it occur elsewhere?Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits13:41, 29 April 2025 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I should have opened thesockpuppet investigation before this discussion; I have since opened one and the investigation is now atWikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SpaghetticodeV. All of the above editors were notified and warned againstconflict-of-interest editing when this noticeboard discussion was created, and the only acknowledgement came from KnownStormChaser, who blanked their user talk page inSpecial:Diff/1288149632 as their second edit on Wikipedia. — Newslinger talk10:18, 7 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Paul Bilzerian (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Junekramer1 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

User:Junekramer1 appears to both have a COI with Paul Bilzerian (edit history since March, and tookthe 2018 photo of subject).

And has now repeatedlydeleted large amounts of cited material from thePaul Bilzerian article.

And in an effort to keep the cited material deleted from that article - since their latest large deletion -has asked for page protection.

I would suggest that we handle the editor the way WP addresses COI editors who edit in this manner. And that the deleted material be restored. Thank you.--184.153.21.19 (talk)21:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• This is convincing to me. I have blocked Junekramer1 indefinitely.Bishonen |tålk22:12, 4 May 2025 (UTC).Reply

• Ahmed Mater (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Arif11 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• Profarthist (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)
• AhmedMater (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

Would be helpful to additional eyes on thisWP:SPA situation.Amigao (talk)22:35, 4 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Article is at AfD and user says they have no COI.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits20:39, 6 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Amigao, I think you have a point. I also noticed something unusual between the two accounts,Arif11 andAhmedMater.Netherzone (talk)17:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

AhemedMater has created a draft,Draft:Arif Alnomay, which is the same name as Arif11'soriginal user page: And now a brand new editor,Profarthist, is adding back unsourced or poorly sourced content that was removed fromAhmed Mater during article clean up. Very interesting coincidences.Netherzone (talk)20:09, 8 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

UserAhmedMater had previously disclosed that they had a conflict of interest on Draft:Arif Alnomay, then removed both the AfC template and their statement thatI disclose that I have a conflict of interest regarding the subject of this article.[2] Whether or not this is UPE, it is clear that there are COI's between the accounts and the articles they edit in coordination with one another.Netherzone (talk)23:58, 8 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• Jarlath Regan (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• JBRProductions (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

I noticed that the infobox image in this article was contributed by this user. The username made me suspicious that this might be Regan or his production team, had a look at the contrib history and noticed that they contributed significantly to the article (diff) back in March 2024. Am I crazy here?Ahuman00 (talk)23:48, 4 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Not crazy. I trimmed some of the most promotional elements.BubbaJoe123456 (talk)14:26, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

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

There's evidence that this user engages in undisclosedpaid editing. His last edits were on a promotional sandbox,User:Webmastertsd/sandbox. On one older userpage version (Special:PermaLink/585085621), there's a link to a commercial webpage (https://animalhospital.com.my/meet-the-team/). This page fits well to his editing contents (promoting Malaysian veterinarians), furthermore, the webmaster/maintainer responsible for the upkeep of this pages is apparently a company using the same initials as the reported user, "TSD". I happened to encounter this individual while looking through recent files on Commons some hours ago. Regards,Grand-Duc (talk)02:13, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

User has not edited since 2013, and has only two extant mainspace edits, one of which corrects a typo in the other. Both were reverted a long time ago.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits12:18, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

That's not true, there were the sandbox edits from 2025-05-03 and 2025-05-04, see:Special:Log/Webmastertsd. Regards,Grand-Duc (talk)14:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• International School of France (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• Danenriquezor (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

This editor has added promotional text,focusing on innovative and engaging learning experiences, to this school article. Sourcing is poor - the school website andhttps://star.fandom.com. I have asked them if they work for or represent the school, and they have repliedi will not disclose if i work with them or not. Not come across this response before, so bringing it here. Thanks.Tacyarg (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Tacyarg (talk)08:08, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

hello, i am still not seeing where on the page i put «  focusing on innovative and engaging learning experiences » if you can help me indicate where on the page this is i will be glad to remove it.Danenriquezor (talk)08:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

You can see it inthis diff.Tacyarg (talk)09:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

i will re-update this page, i will rephrase some sentences since my goal is not to promote in any way this school, rather to give the satistics, it's history, a layout of the school and how it interagtes into the town like a university wich gives it it's uniqueness, again sorry for the mis-understanding i am only trying to preserve the towns history since there isn't as much accsseible information on the internet about it.Danenriquezor (talk)10:43, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Danenriquezor: If you refuse to disclose whether or not you have a COI, editors will reasonably assume that you do have. Therefore, please comply withWP:COI and refrain from editing the article except in the very limited circumstances described there. You may request more substantive changes on the article's talk page.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits12:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

Student, perhaps?   –Skywatcher68 (talk)18:28, 7 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

• International Game Technology (edit |talk |history |links |watch |logs)
• 192.156.111.202 (talk ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·block log)

192.156.111.202 is registered to an IGT subsidiary and has been removing well-sourced lawsuit information, latest edit removed half of the section and replaced the other half with unsourced info.   –Skywatcher68 (talk)15:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)Reply