Obvious paid editors are obvious

Discussion of financial interests of Wikimedia and companies who contribute, or simply spend money on a Wikipedia presence.
User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
kołdry
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Thu Nov 19, 2015 11:48 am

The Adversary wrote: :dry: clearly, you don´t want me to participate on this subject. Point taken. Bye, bye.
I'd love to have you participate here.

My hypothesis goes as follows:

* More women than men participate in the public relations and digital marketing industries. (Edit: This may be a false premise, but it is at least close to 50-50, or could be over 60%.)
* The Wikimedia community wants a greater proportion of women participating on Wikipedia.
* The Wikimedia community shuns or restricts participation on Wikipedia from personnel in the public relations and digital marketing industries.

Something's got to give, don't you think?

I don't understand why you'd feel driven off by my wry comment that focuses mostly on my third point above.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Sat Nov 28, 2015 3:17 pm

Edgar Foxall (T-C-L) is mostly written by Edgarfoxall (T-C-L), obviously not the same person, but maybe his son or grandson. The claim to notability is very weak: his "work features in one of the Penguin poetry anthologies, Poetry of the Thirties (1964)". I am not sure if it would survive an AfD.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

slacker
Banned
Posts: 381
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2015 4:13 pm

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by slacker » Sat Nov 28, 2015 4:02 pm

The almost automatic bad faith assumption that User:X must have a conflict of interest with topic X is one of Wikipedia's biggest flaws re. COI editting. Common sense should tell anyone who has ever editted Wikipedia for a while, that when trying to dream up a user name, in a not insignificant number of cases, their mind will often gravitate to something related to the thing they want to write about. Unless their very first edit's are of the form, "X is the best thing sing sliced bread", then the useless busy bodies who constantly patrol the creation logs for user name 'violations', should simply butt out.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Sat Nov 28, 2015 5:35 pm

slacker wrote:Unless their very first edit's are of the form, "X is the best thing sing sliced bread"...
In many cases, the first edits are indeed in the form of singing bread, and that's how we know they're paid and/or COI editors. They're singing for their bread, as it were.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Nov 30, 2015 6:35 pm

Ambrishraja (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Seems to think that Amrish J. Kawa was first to introduce cardboard furniture to the land of India, and he wants everyone to know it.
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%
Ever warned on Talk page: Numerous times
Blocked: No
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:57 pm

Anyone ever hear of World Fuel Services (T-H-L)? Until today, I hadn't (when I learned that it is supposedly the company headquartered in Florida that has the most revenues).

Wikipedia's current article about the company mentions:
In 2013, the company was named as a co-defendant in various lawsuits as owner of Bakken formation light crude oil aboard a Montreal, Maine and Atlantic Railway train which derailed in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec on July 6, 2013, killing an estimated forty-seven people and destroying much of the community's downtown.
Compare that to the massive article, Lac-Mégantic rail disaster (T-H-L), which even I must admit is a fascinating compilation.

So, given that the shipper of the oil was World Fuel Services, and that this oil killed a bunch of people, including these innocent tykes... you would think that when the oil company (or what we presume to be the oil company) edits Wikipedia to remove any mention of the lawsuits related to that disaster, you would think that this would have raised a stink in the press. But, short of that, you'd think that it would at least motivate a "trusted Wikipedian" to let the corporate editor know about the conflict of interest guidelines, but alas, not a peep on the talk page of User:World Fuel Services Corp. (T-C-L)

We're told that one of the fantastic things about Wikipedia is how practically every edit is closely watched by a team of diligent protectors of neutrality, verifiability, and sourcing. I contend that Wikipedians do a fairly crappy job of this, in fact... but who can blame them, when there's 280 people on the payroll in San Francisco, doing an infinitely smaller amount of such work than the volunteers, when it comes to protecting the integrity of Wikipedia?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Jan 06, 2016 2:30 pm

The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation has awarded an exploratory grant of $250,000 to the Wikimedia Foundation’s "Discovery department".

John S. and James L. Knight Foundation (T-H-L)

Wikipedia article created and mostly initially crafted by Robertsonadams (T-C-L), the webmaster of the Knight Foundation. In his defense, his editing (2005-2011) was long before COI editing by employees of subject articles got to be a "big deal" for the Wikimedia Foundation.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Jan 20, 2016 3:25 pm

Even despite my extensive blog post pointing out how one WMF donor, the John Templeton Foundation (T-H-L), was using multiple accounts from 2007 to 2013 to polish up the Wikipedia article about itself, it appears that they still have no shame in editing with a COI -- but at least they now disclose it.

In typical fashion, first there were numerous attempts to get help on the Talk page of the article, not a single "Wikipedian in good standing" responded, and so Alyssa Settefrati, the Communications Specialist at the John Templeton Foundation, took matters into her own hands and began directly editing the article.

No one gives a shit. The article lede looks like a brochure. Jimbo's Bright Line Rule is not being followed (once again), but Settefrati is within the bounds of the Terms of Use, so legally, this is proper use of the Wikipedia website.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Hex » Wed Jan 20, 2016 4:16 pm

thekohser wrote:who can blame them, when there's 280 people on the payroll in San Francisco, doing an infinitely smaller amount of such work than the volunteers, when it comes to protecting the integrity of Wikipedia?
It would be fun to produce some numbers comparing the volume of content work produced by every paid employee of the WMF to the general volume of edits on the English Wikipedia, say across the last calendar year. Just simple edit counts. And maybe then relate it to how much money they conned the donors out of the same period.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:23 pm

thekohser wrote:Jimbo's Bright Line Rule is not being followed (once again), but Settefrati is within the bounds of the Terms of Use, so legally, this is proper use of the Wikipedia website.
That's the WMF's fault for not drafting the Terms of Use properly.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Jan 20, 2016 8:36 pm

Hex wrote:
thekohser wrote:who can blame them, when there's 280 people on the payroll in San Francisco, doing an infinitely smaller amount of such work than the volunteers, when it comes to protecting the integrity of Wikipedia?
It would be fun to produce some numbers comparing the volume of content work produced by every paid employee of the WMF to the general volume of edits on the English Wikipedia, say across the last calendar year. Just simple edit counts. And maybe then relate it to how much money they conned the donors out of the same period.
That doesn't sound fun to me. But, I suppose you're imagining a result something like this?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Feb 09, 2016 6:05 pm

Hoult123 (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Probably either Tom Gutteridge (T-H-L) or an employee of his production company, Standing Stone, which is located at Hoults Yard. Note that Standing Stone was founded in 2007, and User:Hoult123 began editing Wikipedia in 2008.
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%, for over six years
Ever warned on Talk page: No
Blocked: No

User:Hoult123 is probably immune from Wikimedia's Terms of Use clause about undisclosed paid editing, given that a Tom Gutteridge (probably a namesake of the Standing Stone Gutteridge) is one of the three co-founders of The People's Operator (T-H-L), which Jimbo Wales chairs. Maybe somebody could check with JimboTalk, to see if he's ever spoken with his colleague Tom about what constitutes proper and improper engagement with Wikipedia COI topics, and then they could contact the other Tom Gutteridge about it.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Feb 10, 2016 7:54 pm

Dallastexjr (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Potentially the founder of the Museum of Perth (T-H-L)
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: Appears to be about 85%
Ever warned on Talk page: No
Blocked: No

Interesting to note that on 15 January 2016, there was a Wikipedia Meetup at the Museum of Perth. Then three weeks later there was a Wikipedia article about the Museum of Perth, authored by Dallastexjr to say that the museum "began life as a virtual museum on the social media site Twitter in October 2012 by Dallas Robertson".
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
trout
Regular
Posts: 487
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:24 am
Wikipedia User: Don City Break

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by trout » Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:20 am

Golden_Nugget_Atlantic_City (T-H-L):
Entertainment[edit]
The Showroom is Atlantic City's most intimate entertainment venue. In this 500 seat showroom, every seat is "up front!"

The Grand is a 16,920 square foot ballroom and showcases today's top artists, headline comedians and classic entertainers.

The Deck puts you right at the water's edge and offers live entertainment seasonally.

Rush Lounge offers live entertainment nightly. Located right off of the Main Atrium and directly off of the casino floor. Rush Lounge serves as a spot for guests to relax, enjoy a cocktail, listen to live music, gamble and watch the latest game on flat screen high-definition TV’s.[7]

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Feb 12, 2016 1:02 pm

trout wrote:Golden_Nugget_Atlantic_City (T-H-L):
Entertainment[edit]
The Showroom is Atlantic City's most intimate entertainment venue. In this 500 seat showroom, every seat is "up front!"

The Grand is a 16,920 square foot ballroom and showcases today's top artists, headline comedians and classic entertainers.

The Deck puts you right at the water's edge and offers live entertainment seasonally.

Rush Lounge offers live entertainment nightly. Located right off of the Main Atrium and directly off of the casino floor. Rush Lounge serves as a spot for guests to relax, enjoy a cocktail, listen to live music, gamble and watch the latest game on flat screen high-definition TV’s.[7]
The article has been extensively overhauled by Yngvadottir and someone called Carrite; they are evidently happy with it.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Randy from Boise
Been Around Forever
Posts: 12242
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 2:32 am
Wikipedia User: Carrite
Wikipedia Review Member: Timbo
Actual Name: Tim Davenport
Nom de plume: T. Chandler
Location: Boise, Idaho

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Randy from Boise » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:20 pm

Poetlister wrote:
trout wrote:Golden_Nugget_Atlantic_City (T-H-L):
Entertainment[edit]
The Showroom is Atlantic City's most intimate entertainment venue. In this 500 seat showroom, every seat is "up front!"

The Grand is a 16,920 square foot ballroom and showcases today's top artists, headline comedians and classic entertainers.

The Deck puts you right at the water's edge and offers live entertainment seasonally.

Rush Lounge offers live entertainment nightly. Located right off of the Main Atrium and directly off of the casino floor. Rush Lounge serves as a spot for guests to relax, enjoy a cocktail, listen to live music, gamble and watch the latest game on flat screen high-definition TV’s.[7]
The article has been extensively overhauled by Yngvadottir and someone called Carrite; they are evidently happy with it.
She beat me to it and edit-conflicted my limited contribution out of it, I understand. Gotta have insomnia pretty early in the day to beat them Euros.....

RfB

User avatar
trout
Regular
Posts: 487
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:24 am
Wikipedia User: Don City Break

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by trout » Sat Feb 13, 2016 6:54 am

Poetlister wrote: The article has been extensively overhauled by Yngvadottir and someone called Carrite; they are evidently happy with it.
Hard to see where anyone's benefited, they could have kept the information about the facilities and removed the promotional wording. And look at the wiki-babble they didn't remove:
The resort sits on a 14.6 acres (5.9 ha) property and contains a 74,252 sq ft (6,898.2 m2) casino; 728 guest rooms; seven restaurants; a nightclub; a 462-seat theater; a 16,920 sq ft (1,572 m2) recreation deck with a health spa, outdoor heated pool, hot tubs, cabanas, tennis and basketball courts, and jogging track; 50,922 sq ft (4,730.8 m2) of meeting and function space; a nine-story parking garage with direct walk-through into the complex; and the 640-slip Frank Farley Marina (a public facility owned by the New Jersey Division of Parks and Forestry and managed by Landry's).

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Apr 01, 2016 4:02 pm

Rpaul9578 (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Probably an employee of C.A. Walker Research Solutions (T-H-L) (which Wikipedia says has only 25 employees)
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: For two months in 2010, it was 100%. He came back in 2015, though, to make an unrelated edit!
Ever warned on Talk page: A few image licensing warnings
Blocked: No
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Apr 01, 2016 8:25 pm

thekohser wrote:Rpaul9578 (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Probably an employee of C.A. Walker Research Solutions (T-H-L) (which Wikipedia says has only 25 employees)
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: For two months in 2010, it was 100%. He came back in 2015, though, to make an unrelated edit!
Ever warned on Talk page: A few image licensing warnings
Blocked: No
His 2015 edit was faulty, incorrectly putting text in <ref> tags. That remains uncorrected after nearly a year.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Apr 05, 2016 7:46 pm

Only because it's currently in the news...

This edit was by a marketing employee of Mossack Fonseca (T-H-L). He only became compliant with WMF Terms of Use about three months later.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:24 pm

Foursouthpaws (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Probably has some vested interest in Orchid Bay, Belize (T-H-L)
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%
Ever warned on Talk page: Only a mild warning about an ill-formated REDIRECT template
Blocked: No


I came to check out whether Orchid Bay had its own article on Wikipedia, since the community management company seems to have plastered the web with numerous "how to move to Belize" articles that all seem to end up saying, "if you move to Belize, you should move to Orchid Bay". Looks like they infiltrated Wikipedia quite easily, and nobody's ever had a complaint.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue May 24, 2016 9:13 pm

Spoke today with a VP of market research at a financial services company (about $10B in revenue), and he mentioned their past use of a content-management platform that they used, called "GIA". Of course, to find out more about it, I turned to Wikipedia, knowing that what I found could probably be fairly trustworthy, because it would be written by insiders at the company itself, not by Cheetos-encrusted kids in their basements.

I was not disappointed. Global Intelligence Alliance Group (T-H-L) has been written almost 90% by three single-purpose accounts:

Newtonslaw40 (T-C-L)
Sunshine 20000 (T-C-L)
Newday2014 (T-C-L)

Couple of warnings here and there, but for the most part, nobody really gives a darn that these guys wrote the article for their own organization (or perhaps client, if it's a PR deal). Why is there a WP:COI policy again?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Jul 11, 2016 4:52 pm

They've only been active for a month, but if PenguinsElite (T-C-L) isn't a paid editor working for a TV production company or possibly a automotive content distribution company, then I would be very, very surprised.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:03 pm

Someone at work diversifying Wikipedia content:

RTLLC (T-C-L)
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:13 pm

Need a Wikipedia article written about a uranium mining company that recently went through newsworthy struggles, but you don't want the Wikipedia to say anything unpleasant about the company?

Then HomersDoh (T-C-L) to the rescue!
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Jul 11, 2016 5:19 pm

Can you guess which hit Broadway musical that Wikipedia editor Hamiltonhamilton (T-C-L) has been working on?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Jul 13, 2016 3:03 pm

The previous four posts were the result of my simply casually looking through 100 new articles that were created (and thus survived) about 6 or 7 days ago. I think it's safe to conclude that self-interested, single-purpose editors are still a substantial component in the new article creation process. You would think that after 15+ years, Wikipedia policy and public relations efforts would have finally stamped that out, if they were serious about it.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Jul 13, 2016 9:11 pm

thekohser wrote:The previous four posts were the result of my simply casually looking through 100 new articles that were created (and thus survived) about 6 or 7 days ago. I think it's safe to conclude that self-interested, single-purpose editors are still a substantial component in the new article creation process. You would think that after 15+ years, Wikipedia policy and public relations efforts would have finally stamped that out, if they were serious about it.
The rules exist. They just don't have enough competent people to enforce the rules.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Hex » Thu Jul 14, 2016 10:24 pm

Sundog (company) (T-H-L) is a marketing and technology company based in Fargo, North Dakota with offices in Denver, Colorado and Minneapolis, Minnesota.
As an article, it's also almost entirely the work of a single-purpose account, Pljohnso (T-C-L). Could that, by any chance, be Preston Johnson, a writer for Sundog, who has the Twitter name @prestojohnso? Hmmm. I wonder.

It was created as a subpage of Pljohnso's user page and moved to mainspace by a user called NTox (T-C-L), with no obvious sign of how NTox found it there. However, NTox's first edits were all to Concordia College (Moorhead, Minnesota) (T-H-L) . Moorhead and Fargo are two halves of the same metro area, divided by a river. You do the math.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:08 pm

That's all in accordance with policy, isn't it? The user with a COI made no edits to article space, only to his own user space. It was then moved to article space by someone not employed by that company, and probably not paid to do so, who therefore cannot be called a paid editor. You can't stop editors doing favours for friends.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Jul 15, 2016 12:42 pm

Hex wrote:
Sundog (company) (T-H-L) is a marketing and technology company based in Fargo, North Dakota with offices in Denver, Colorado and Minneapolis, Minnesota.
As an article, it's also almost entirely the work of a single-purpose account, Pljohnso (T-C-L). Could that, by any chance, be Preston Johnson, a writer for Sundog, who has the Twitter name @prestojohnso? Hmmm. I wonder.

It was created as a subpage of Pljohnso's user page and moved to mainspace by a user called NTox (T-C-L), with no obvious sign of how NTox found it there. However, NTox's first edits were all to Concordia College (Moorhead, Minnesota) (T-H-L) . Moorhead and Fargo are two halves of the same metro area, divided by a river. You do the math.
I like how the very first footnote citation no longer has anything to do with the company. They intended to link to this, which was simply a newsletter publication by their insurance company, who was doing a "client spotlight" story in the newsletter. That's balls.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Kingsindian » Fri Aug 19, 2016 12:49 pm

Olympics! I don't know if this is paid or COI editing.

I noticed this curious case of Jan Ø. Jørgensen (T-H-L).
Jan Østergaard Jørgensen[3] (born December 31, 1987 in Aalborg) is a male badminton player from Denmark. He plays in the Denmark Badminton league representing SIF (Skovshoved). Sportswear and equipment is sponsored by Yonex.
Originally the sentence was added by an IP in Denmark with the name of the previous sponsor. It was updated here.

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Kingsindian » Fri Aug 19, 2016 11:19 pm

European Centre for a Modern Ukraine (T-H-L), recently in the news as a non-profit associated with Yanukovych and Trump's former campaign chief Paul Manafort. Created a couple of years ago by an IP in Washington DC, whose other contribution was to add a paragraph to the Podesta Group (T-H-L) article mentioning its link.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Thu Sep 15, 2016 12:15 am

Maybe not "obvious", but something strikes me as odd about how Huggi (T-C-L) has received many notices on his Talk page about articles of his that were deleted, which he promptly erases without archiving.

Normally, this wouldn't arouse that much suspicion, but the articles are subjects like South East Asian Vegetarian Union, Brownice, Happycow, Joie (restaurant), Adam Moledina, Stateless Transport Tunneling, etc.

Something ain't right.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Kingsindian » Tue Sep 20, 2016 6:29 pm

I don't know if there's a COI thread, but I'll just drop this here.

Sikivu Hutchinson (T-H-L)

Started by Dante8 (T-C-L) who has since been indef blocked for multiple copyvios.
Totally rewritten by Sgerbic (T-C-L), who lists herself as the co-founder of Monterey County Skeptics. She also has a WP page.
Another editor visible in the history is Blackskeptic (T-C-L), who seems to do nothing else other than edit this article and the one for Hutchinson's father.

The page is, not surprisingly, a puff piece. There are lots of citations to the Center for Inquiry (T-H-L), a skeptic organization.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Sep 21, 2016 5:38 pm

How brilliant would it be if Professors Ling Cen and Sean Xin Xu were actually working "undercover" for a paid editing firm? Businesses like Continental Materials Corporation (T-H-L) and Hatteras Financial Corp (T-H-L) get their beautiful paid articles, students get their college course credit, and the professors get a little spending cash on the side to augment their academic salaries.

Of course, I am not suggesting that this is what is actually going on (indeed, they expressly say "This teaching collaboration is for educational purpose only. It does not represent any commercial interest.") -- but wouldn't it be brilliant? Wikipedians wouldn't be able to do anything to stop them, because it's a "teaching collaboration" that the WMF and the Wikimedia movement support with open arms!
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Sep 27, 2016 12:02 pm

Megantague (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Could it possibly be that this is the social media manager for the General Assembly (school) (T-H-L)?
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%
Ever warned on Talk page: No
Blocked: No

And don't forget who else works for General Assembly...

Image

Tsk, tsk... Jorm, you ought to have a word with the young lady.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:08 pm

Malskowronska (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Could possibly be Margaret Skowronska, Business Manager at MJ Boyd Consulting (T-H-L)
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%
Ever warned on Talk page: Numerous notifications that her article draft had been rejected
Blocked: No

Image
Margaret Skowronska


But not to worry, along comes...

Holahlaskar (T-C-L) to sweep away the rejected draft tag, and move it to article space, no questions asked!

And, fear not, a trusted Wikipedian let single-purpose account Holahlaskar know that he (or she) "did a nice job".
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Oct 25, 2016 2:44 pm

The Category:Employment agencies is chock-full of paid editors and COI drive-bys.

Agencyfiller (T-C-L)

Aquishongkong (T-C-L)

Rraaqqiibb (T-C-L)

Suellen605 (T-C-L)

Koskanaris (T-C-L)

Mamtak 2008 (T-C-L)

Msmith2010 (T-C-L)

ClaireFowler (T-C-L)

WWY1941 (T-C-L)

Padivi (T-C-L)

Watkinc (T-C-L)

Abrobo819 (T-C-L)

Nobody seems to care. For all the "tough talk" that Jimbo and the WMF spew forth about making sure paid editors stay away from Wikipedia, these kinds of editors are free and clear to do as they please on the site.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Tue Oct 25, 2016 8:17 pm

thekohser wrote:And, fear not, a trusted Wikipedian let single-purpose account Holahlaskar know that he (or she) "did a nice job".
Isn't it lovely to see such a superb example of WP:AGF. :D Shouldn't that be applied to all cases of suspect COI? :D
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Oct 28, 2016 1:46 am

Anyone have any idea which website Smallbones is babbling on mysteriously about here? Based on how he covered his tracks and self-reverted and left us cliff-hanging with a promise of a private e-mail to Der Jimbo, I'm going to guess that he's got nothing of substance. Boney, why don't you come here and tell us about it? We have no WP:OUTING policy here.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
tarantino
Habitué
Posts: 4791
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by tarantino » Fri Nov 18, 2016 1:55 am

One of the more interesting paid editors I've come across is Ed Sussman, who's BC1278 (T-C-L) and Edsussman (T-C-L). He has a law degree from Duke, was a journalist, ran fastcompany.com and inc.com, and is now a PR rep for Facebook and others. The first article he created was Social_journalism (T-H-L), where he's prominently featured. He's quite the self-promoter.

User avatar
Eclipsed
Critic
Posts: 157
Joined: Sun Mar 18, 2012 3:48 pm
Wikipedia User: 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR
Wikipedia Review Member: Eclipsed

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Eclipsed » Sat Nov 19, 2016 4:02 pm

thekohser wrote:Anyone have any idea which website Smallbones is babbling on mysteriously about here? Based on how he covered his tracks and self-reverted and left us cliff-hanging with a promise of a private e-mail to Der Jimbo, I'm going to guess that he's got nothing of substance. Boney, why don't you come here and tell us about it? We have no WP:OUTING policy here.
Maybe WikiWash? Although that has been around since 2014.

Hex
Retired
Posts: 4130
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:40 pm
Wikipedia User: Scott
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Hex » Fri Dec 16, 2016 6:01 pm

Plasmarok (T-H-L)
Plasmarok is a registered name for the fully recovered vitrified aggregate created by the Advanced Plasma Power Gasplasma waste to energy process.
Created by Richard.lafferty (T-C-L) in 2010 - aka the Communications Officer of Advanced Plasma Power Ltd.
It is mechanically strong and environmentally benign.
Is it? Mr. Lafferty didn't deign to provide a citation. But Wikipedia has been providing his company with a free platform to advertise its product at the top of Google for the last six years.
My question, to this esteemed Wiki community, is this: Do you think that a Wiki could successfully generate a useful encyclopedia? -- JimboWales
Yes, but in the end it wouldn't be an encyclopedia. It would be a wiki. -- WardCunningham (Jan 2001)

User avatar
AndyTheGrump
Habitué
Posts: 3193
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 11:44 pm
Wikipedia User: AndyTheGrump (editor/heckler)

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by AndyTheGrump » Fri Dec 16, 2016 8:36 pm

Hex wrote:Plasmarok (T-H-L)
Plasmarok is a registered name for the fully recovered vitrified aggregate created by the Advanced Plasma Power Gasplasma waste to energy process.
Created by Richard.lafferty (T-C-L) in 2010 - aka the Communications Officer of Advanced Plasma Power Ltd.
It is mechanically strong and environmentally benign.
Is it? Mr. Lafferty didn't deign to provide a citation. But Wikipedia has been providing his company with a free platform to advertise its product at the top of Google for the last six years.
There for six years, but gone within minutes (as "Unambiguous advertising or promotion") as soon as it is mentioned here...

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Dec 16, 2016 9:35 pm

Deleted by Laser brain (T-C-L), not someone I'm familiar with. Unfortunately, there seems to be nothing intermediate between leaving the article intact and deleting it, leaving no article on something that may be notable.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Feb 14, 2017 8:48 pm

It becomes increasingly difficult to understand who does worse for the reader of Wikipedia -- the insiders who think they know what they're doing is for the reader's own "good", or the corporate guys who think they're doing the right thing by the reader.

You know, "just to name a few".
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Mar 07, 2017 3:36 pm

Painfully obvious, in my opinion...

RMRicondo (T-C-L)

Lauren Broussard (T-C-L)

SGrimmer (T-C-L); Consciousleader (T-C-L); Apreston (T-C-L); Soulwork742 (T-C-L); Inspiredleader (T-C-L); MJ888 (T-C-L); and InspiredDreamer25 (T-C-L) (all part of what appears to be a 10-year campaign)

Simea 99 (T-C-L)

JCYeh13 (T-C-L) and Keiradog (T-C-L)

Google Child (T-C-L); Cheyenna Burns (T-C-L); ButterflyHerder (T-C-L); and GuyBurns33 (T-C-L)

Mdutilepr (T-C-L); Asusundevil23 (T-C-L); and Ajtotman (T-C-L)

Lemzee (T-C-L) (for four long, dedicated years)

I could go on, but I grow weary...
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:44 pm

Another three-and-a-half-year program, underway here.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13410
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Obvious paid editors are obvious

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Apr 05, 2017 7:47 pm

Consider Alison Beckwith Consulting...

Then consider the following Wikipedia users:

Ajbeckwith (T-C-L) and Abeckwith (T-C-L)
Likely COI: Every edit has been about a Beckwith client, including Edit Number One to discuss the Main Page of Wikipedia!
Disclosure: None
Unity of focus: 100%
Ever warned on Talk page: Various warnings initially that content was not up to snuff.
Blocked: No

That's over six years of plugging away on Wikipedia, yet Smallbones has never noticed her. It's a shame that driving her off will hurt the gender gap, so maybe she should be welcomed?

Also, Chemsoph (T-C-L).
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

Post Reply