Re: Paid Editing on WP is permissible

Post by **ericbarbour** » Thu Mar 15, 2018 11:59 pm

Post by **ericbarbour** » Mon Mar 19, 2018 2:34 am

Discussed on the TCA mailing list today:

For the early history of IT&T, see this part of the wikipedia page {https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITT_Inc.#Beginnings_and_early_acquisitions} on IT&T. However, there is a mistake there - They say that International Western Electric was the UK company. International Western Electric was based in New York City; the British division was called Western Electric Ltd. before and some time after the IT&T acquisition.

I couldn't help commenting further:

That's probably not the only mistake in that article--it's been fought over by Wikipedia leftists and paid editors. So we have all that stuff about the WWII period and their good relations with the Third Reich, which was copied almost unchanged to the Sosthenes Behn biography.

And that is followed by the KONI Group paragraph, which looks like advertising copy. It was inserted in September 2015 by a guy whom I suspect of performing undeclared paid editing. He really, really, really likes to talk abut Japanese cars.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =678342280

The ITT article is sloppy and not very detailed, and for a company like ITT with a long and "colorful" history, that's unacceptable. Excessive focus on the dirty political tricks and not much about their actual business units and products.

Plus:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kathleen_Bark

And there you have Wikipedia. It won't tell you about ITT's corporate history, so much as it will tell you about people fighting over ITT's history. Every hour is amateur hour in Wiki-land.

(Don't forget the Ludwig Roselius article. He was involved with ITT because they were both major holders of Focke-Wulf stock. There's a book that claims Roselius tried to assassinate Hitler and "may have been" strangled, possibly by Hitler himself; there's no hard evidence but Wikipedia reports it as if it really happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Roselius#Movie)

Post by **ericbarbour** » Thu Apr 05, 2018 5:20 am

Lolol one of these things is NOT LIKE THE OTHERS (we must evidently put this in Sesame Street terms, since the people who run Wikipedia act like children):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boracay

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/04/asia/phi ... index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/as ... 5f1611eb21

Might want to ask Wtmitchell about this.....

sashi · Post by **sashi** » Thu Apr 05, 2018 6:12 pm

That kind of makes me want to ask him how he missed such a "minor" story for so long if he'd really already lived there ten years in 2006.

The afore-linked author's en.wp page has problems too. (Thomas J. Goreau)

Post by **ericbarbour** » Sat Apr 07, 2018 8:07 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HelloGiggles

One of the dumbest websites I've ever seen that was putatively "intended for adults".

Creators and major editors; ThreeHGwi and WeThreeHG.

Orangemike snarled at them so they backed off. Then the idiot genius TheRedPenOfDoom showed up and basically restored the stupid happy-talk.

BTW: Zooey Deschanel really is quite a massive shitstorm of abusive editing. She's a TV actress but judging from the edit history and talkpage, she's some kind of evil political figure. Damned if I can figure it out. (She is a founder of HelloGiggles and I certainly hope she made some money off it, because it's a stupid website....)

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Sun Apr 08, 2018 4:09 pm

For those who don't know, this guy is the top beurocrat in the EU. He had a little trouble with Wikipedia recently, but what major political figure doesn't?

Oh, and did you know both his grandfathers won the Iron Cross fighting for Nazi Germany, and his family owns a castle? I certainly didn't. Well, until I clicked a few links on Wikipedia. I haven't verified whether it is true or not - I'm waiting for what is surely to be the best episode of "Who Do You Think You Are?" ever.

Post by **ericbarbour** » Sun Apr 08, 2018 9:14 pm

FWIW, emphasis added
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Selmayr

Selmayr was appointed Deputy Secretary-General of the European Commission in February 2018. Minutes after this appointment, Juncker informed the European Commissioners that the then Secretary-General, Alexander Italianer, intended to retire; they had not been previously notified of this.[11] On 1 March 2018, following the formal retirement of Italianer, Selmayr was approved by the College of Commissioners to replace him as Secretary-General.[12] Some media sources claimed that support for Selmayr had been "bought", and with others claiming that Selmayr had "forced" his way into the position.[13] The President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker has threatened to resign if the controversy leads to Selmayr’s dismissal.[14] On 25 March 2018 the Commission issued a formal statement claiming that Selmayr's promotion was in accordance with legal procedures.[15] In the immediate aftermath of his appointment as Secretary-General of the European Commission it was reported that Selmayr had been editing Wikipedia using his own name[16] from an account using a verified ec.europa.eu email address.[17] The Commission stated that he did so to correct specific information (including his work positions as well as political and religious affiliations), "in direct interaction with a Wikipedia editor, who checked and verified all information ...and ensured that it is properly referenced".[18][19]

Perhaps someone should ask Tataral why he put so much time obsessively working on articles about German politics, the EU, and politicians associated with the EU? He created Selmayr's article, along with those of many other political figures. Somewhat suspicious.

Merging to the "Paid editing" thread btw.

Post by **ericbarbour** » Fri Apr 13, 2018 11:26 pm

Only because he's all over the news today:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elliott_Broidy

Created in 2014 by Zigzag20s, who looks like an addict for articles about political figures (usually deceased). But has done some questionable things.

Broidy later got happy-luv edits from SPIs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... salsaverde
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:C ... ticalshape

In March 2018, when news stories about Broidy's connections to Michael Cohen started to appear, the ever-biased MelanieN started making it as negative as she could. She literally removed factual and well-sourced hard information.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... =829734244

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Fri May 04, 2018 9:07 pm

Somebody over at Wikipediocracy highlighted this very strange block by SmartSE.

11:17, 21 April 2018 Smartse (talk | contribs) blocked Curious numismatist (talk | contribs) with an expiration time of indefinite (account creation blocked) (Advertising)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines.

What makes it strange, is he refused to tell the user what the offending edits were, that triggered a no warning block of this relatively new user. When Huon initially reviewed the block, he could see nothing problematic, until SmartSE emailed him, after which he admitted he now sees the issue, and thinks the user isn't addressing it in their unblock request.

The user in question denies making any promotional edits and complying with all relevant policies.

My super investigation skills quickly turned up this related detail, which must be what Huon missed......

11:17, 21 April 2018 Smartse (talk | contribs) deleted page John P. Connaughton (G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion)

That article was created by the now blocked user, on 9 April. The user then edited the Bain Capital page, to wikilink it (said person is a partner there).

It is all very curious. The exact match in timestamps seems to prove the reason for the block is that SmartSE thinks said user is the BLP subject, in which case, has he seemingly just blocked them out of the blue as a form of entrapment, to see if they would deny being that person, or someone with a COI. Which, if they did, of course justifies the block. And if they didn't, they presumably get unblocked, plastered with templates and given lectures about what a naughty boy they are, and put on a watchlist.

Now, I have followed with interest and indeed amusement, the ratcheting up of the Wikipediot's sense of paranoia and hostility to UDPE, but even I cannot recall them ever going so far as authorising no warning indef blocks for a user simply for creating a promotional article.

I suppose this could be a case of a known serial offender, hence all the secrecy, but I thought their preferred approach in that situation was public naming and shaming, and or calling Legal, the cops and the UN.

One other possibility exists - this is a banned troll simply trying to look like UDPE for the lulz, and a brand new poster announcing it on Wikipediocracy certainly lends that theory weight. But surely if SmartSE knows that, he has a duty to make it clear they do not believe the BLP subject is trying to abuse Wikipedia. Because if I can figure it out, those nasty people at Wikipediocracy will too, eventually, and probably jump straight to that conclusion, and malign this poor venture capitalist's public reputation.

CrowsNest · Post by **CrowsNest** » Sat May 05, 2018 8:47 am

http://wikipediocracy.com/forum/viewtop ... ead#unread

Wikipedia Sucks!

Wikipedia Sucks!

Re: Paid Editing on WP is permissible

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing

Martin Selmayr, Secretary-General of the European Commission

Re: Martin Selmayr, Secretary-General of the European Commis

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing

Re: Paid Editing