Was in a presentation yesterday, where the organization
Educause (T-H-L) was mentioned. I'm going to take a risk here and start a post in this thread about Educause, then examine the Wikipedia article to see if there's COI, paid, or extensive single-purpose editors at work. That's how convinced I am that any middling-notability organization can't keep its hands off its Wikipedia content. Here goes...
Stub created in 2005 by Dan McCreary,
Dmccreary (T-C-L). Other than Dan attending a couple of conferences that Educause representatives also attended, this looks like a completely clean bill of health for the article's creation.
The top three content volume contributors are:
Philoctetes1 (T-C-L) - Red-linked, single-purpose account with one large edit.
ADobkin (T-C-L) - Alan Dobkin, looks clean. (Fellow Emory alumni, with yours truly.)
Malcolma (T-C-L) - Looks clean.
The top two frequent contributors are:
Pumpkiny (T-C-L) - Single-purpose account, active in late 2006.
63.156.186.130 (T-C-L) - Single-purpose account, active in June 2013 and April 2014, converting text to a more marketing-oriented style. Geo-locates to northwestern Denver, where Educause is headquartered.
Overall, this is a fairly good report card (not that there's anything wrong with COI or paid editing!), but not pristine by Jimbo's Bright Line Rule standard.