Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

Welcome to Conflict of interest Noticeboard (COIN)
Shortcuts WP:COI/N WP:COIN WP:COIBOARD Sections older than 14 days archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. Click here to purge this page (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.
When starting a discussion about an editor, you must leave a notice on their talk page. 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:

• Technological Institute of the Philippines (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• TopOfTheWorld62 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 45.114.134.220 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Tip acct (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Allandgo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The registered editor, whose name is apparently inspired by a lyric from the school's fight song, We're on top of the world (link here), and the year the school was founded, 1962, appears to have a close connection to the school itself. A few days ago I made some copy edits and cleanup to the article to make it a bit more encyclopedic (diff) only for them to be reverted (diff), restoring mostly promotional content that have been directly lifted from the school's official website; much of it appears to have been copied directly from the site's History page. It's also worth noting that the editor was templated in their talk for using a name that tends to represent the school, and they may be using the linked IP account to make further COI edits. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 12:57, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've added another userlink to a user whose name suggests a blatant close connection to the article's subject; I have reverted their edits in this diff. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 12:55, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from User talk:Tip acct

The changes we made reflect the most current updates about our institution. The updated information is based on actual facts, as the previous content is no longer applicable. 45.114.134.220 (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2025 (UTC)

@45.114.134.220: Your edits were reverted because they're promotional in tone, not supported with attribution to reliable, secondary sources, and done without proper disclosure of your involvement with the school. If editing the article is part of your job, you are required to disclose this per our terms of use; the practice of editing or creating articles about yourself, your family or friends, your organization, your clients, or your competitors is actually discouraged by Wikipedia. Kindly go to WP:DISCLOSE on how to disclose a general COI or WP:COIPAYDISCLOSE for a paid-contribution disclosure. Non compliance may result in you and your alternate accounts getting indefinitely blocked from editing in addition to sockpuppetry, which is the use of multiple Wikipedia accounts for malicious purposes. Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 05:51, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update 2: I'm adding another user link to an editor who may have a COI with the article based on their edit history Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wendelin Küpers (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Kuepers (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user right here has recently created an article I believe on himself (username gives a pretty big hint). In the entire article there is nothing negative about the subject. Even ignoring that, the person is undoubtably not notable. The user has had his user page deleted because Wikipedia is not a web host and I believe he is trying again but with an article instead of his own User Page. DotesConks (talk) 22:13, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've WP:PRODed it. If the prod is rejected, it can go to AfD, which it surely won't pass. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:44, 15 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hi, I created this page not as promotion page, as a translation of the German page, What do you mean by loaded langugage? How do you define notable? I can provide further evidence if needed. thanks for your understanding with kind regards Wendelin Küpers Kuepers (talk) 08:54, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, the German-language Wikipedia project has its own standards regarding article content, and accordingly, what is acceptable there may not be here and vice versa. As for notability, read WP:NACADEMIC, which is the relevant guideline. Note also that Wikipedia is not a web hosting service, that biographical articles are not resumes, and that content should be primarily based on what independent sources have to say about the subject. AndyTheGrump (talk) 13:50, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kuepers So I was wrong on loaded language and I apologize for that, but I am correct that there is nothing negative about the person. Not one mistake, controversy, or even dispute the article's subject has been in. Which I will give you the benefit of the doubt and say, maybe he was just a good guy and tried his hardest not to get into disputes. Even then, the subject would fail the test of notability. I can summarize the entire article in 3 sentences: Wendelin Kupers goes to college, he studies a perfectly normal subject, gets his PhD, and becomes a lecturer at a university. He has co-published many books. There is nothing notable about him. He didn't find a cure to cancer, he didn't invent a way to travel faster than the speed of light, he didn't discover an entire species of microbiomes. He is just your regular scientist, went through college, got his degree, teaches at university, and co-publishes a few books. DotesConks (talk) 17:36, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wendelin Küpers. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:41, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Vegan Camp Out (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Simply patience 405 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• 2A00:23C7:8EED:4D00:64F3:8AE7:96A0:33F1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has disclosed their connection to Vegan Camp Out, stating on the talk page that they work for them. They have repeatedly made biased edits, including deleting sourced content and adding promotional material.

Have tried to explain to them and link them to help pages on Wikipedia referencing policies etc. but they've repeatedly sourced the organisation's own website/social media and personal conversations they've had with the organisers.

Page was semi-protected for a week due to their edit-warring, but pretty much as soon as the protection was lifted they copy-and-pasted the exact same edit again.

Their language is clearly promotional. Seems they probably made their account solely for this purpose. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RufusLechuga (talk • contribs)

Just to say they only have one edit on the actual article. Secretlondon (talk) 19:49, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but to clarify, they actually made numerous edits despite being reverted. The original ones however show up as IPs (mostly 185.85.253.74 but there was another one too). But it's copy-and-paste identical wording to the edits under their username and they did say on the talk page they were their edits.

It's a significant edit which removed referenced info and replaced with unreferenced promotional wording. They made the edit probably about 6 times even after it was reverted.

This time they appear to have left some of the original citations in, despite them now contradicting the unreferenced information they've replaced it with, in order to make it looks as though it's "referenced". RufusLechuga (talk) 20:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This has continued as recently as 21 March. I have just removed several promotional statements that were cited to an article headed "Advertisement". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The IP Ive just added above just restored the advertorial citation, using the same language about "disruptive editing", etc, that Simply patience 405 has been using. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:46, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Erin Sarofsky (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Coreyfullmorejr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Persistent use of promotional language,[1] removing issue templates without addressing them,[2] inserting links to the subject's company,[3] re-adding unreliable sources after they were removed.[4] They were warned about COI editing in January [5] and continued to edit the article in question without addressing the warning.[6] Without trying to out this user, if their username is their real-world name, you can see that that individual works for the article subject's company and specifically works as a "creative social media specialist with a focus on paid media" (according to LinkedIn). Vegantics (talk) 20:54, 20 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have draftified the article based on fairly clear undisclosed paid editing + lack of demonstrated notability. Melcous (talk) 01:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Berkeley College (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Pbabadelis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This editor has a clear and direct undisclosed paid connection to the college but has not complied with our Terms of Service despite being asked to several years ago. They admit on their User Talk page to being connected to the college and I will leave it to others to draw their own conclusion about how exactly Pbabadelis is connected to the college; WP:OUTING prevents me from saying how I came to this conclusion but I trust that anyone with a few seconds and access to a search engine can find the connection. ElKevbo (talk) 22:03, 21 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, I believe there is a clear conflict of interest. User significantly and only contributed to Berkeley college. In 2020 admitted connection to the subject. 𝐌P⚚𝛂n 𓃠 {✝alk} 00:31, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Quintessential (company) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Commercialindustrial (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This editor has made 42 edits, most of which have been to Quintessential (company), including moving the rejected draft to article space, which contradicted the rejection, and then moving it back to article space after it was draftified. The editor has been evasive when asked whether they have a conflict of interest. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:20, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note that as an uninvolved editor I just cleaned up Quintessential (company), after Robert McClenon posted this COI report - previous version. My advice to Commercialindustrial is to declare any COI if you have one and talk page suggestions would be overviewed (process). Either way, additions like direct links to app stores are not going to fly. Commander Keane (talk) 05:18, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of interest, did you find anything more than articles about the company acquiring property? My reading of WP:ORG is that as it stands, the content fails notability as WP:ORGTRIV. I looked for other stuff but it's a sea of humdrum reports that the company bought this or that building.OsFish (talk) 05:31, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have access to a business/newspaper archive anymore (I had to request a pdf for this from a Wikipedian actually) so I can't do a thorough search. The news articles I can find are all about humdrum buy/sells, but they interview someone from the company and/or discuss property strategies. No controversy (although I just found the executive chair's comment "I am bullshit on industrial" which must be comforting for investors). A lot of stories from the Australian Financial Review which is influential in Australia. I would say the company has "ongoing media coverage" as mentioned in guide WP:SUBSTANTIAL (just below WP:ORGTRIV) but I won't be tied to Quintessential in a deletion discussion. Commander Keane (talk) 06:49, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI, I have nominated the article for deletion as it fails notability. DotesConks (talk) 17:45, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Kllo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Kl1los (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

WP:AUTOBIO: User seemingly does not have anything to do with subject of the page, as Kllo is Australian and the artist the COI editor is promoting is Arabic. Replaced the "History" section with a promo for their album. User only has edited this page. – [ɑƞʈuɼeđ] [⍣] [⁂] 12:41, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have pointed the user to Wikipedia:Articles for creation on their talk page. Could be a misunderstanding of disambiguation, AfC should explain COI. Commander Keane (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like page hijacking. Secretlondon (talk) 13:54, 22 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks disruptive editing[7][8] plus article hijacking.[9] 𝐌P⚚𝛂n 𓃠 {✝alk} 00:42, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sumit Gupta (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Shashwat Singh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Naanioffl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Attempted to discuss with editor but their responses are exhausting. Clear COI and possible UPE. Discusses started by another user on this thread of Naanioffl's talk page. The next two sections have more of the COI discussion. User has created very promotional pages. Out of their 19 total creations, eight have now been deleted (and one currently at AfD). Despite denying their COI, they uploaded the photo for Sumit Gupta claiming it as their own work. When asked, they said they were at an event with the subject. They also uploaded the photo for Shashwat Singh claiming it as their own work. They then added that both subjects were at the even. The backgrounds are clearly not the same event of appear to be take by the same photographer. Also note that the dates of the images are a month apart so it was not the same event. CNMall41 (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding link to Commons as a lot of the images uploaded are claimed as own work. --CNMall41 (talk) 22:52, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, your assumptions are not completely right. I used to attend Multiple events where both the persons used to come. I took their photos. I thought they are notable to be in Wikipedia. I gone though their work and career via deep search on Google. I came across their lots of news articles. Based on those news sources I wrote the wikipedia articles in a non promotional manner and every statement is supported by news source citations too. Naanioffl (talk) 23:03, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You also have other images in Commons which you claim are yours. You stated same event, now lots of events. This is why we are at COIN. Your explanations are exhausting. I will bow out now and let others opine. --CNMall41 (talk) 23:18, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am attending various events and taking pictures of various celerities and public figures. I am creating Wikipedia articles of those who has no Wikipedia page. I felt that these two people are notable enough to be on Wikipedia and That's why I wrote their articles in a non promotional way and I have given proper citations of all the information mentioned in those WikiPedia articles. Naanioffl (talk) 18:37, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't have any COI or close connection with the Subjects. Naanioffl (talk) 18:38, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The claim that Sumit Gupta does not meet Wikipedia’s notability guidelines for biographies is incorrect. His notability is well-established through significant coverage in multiple independent, reliable sources, as well as recognition from prestigious organisations. Here’s why:

1.⁠ ⁠Independent & Reliable Coverage in Leading Publications Sumit Gupta has been extensively covered by some of the most reputable Indian and global media houses. These articles are not merely interviews or passing mentions—they provide in-depth analysis of his role in shaping India’s crypto landscape.

Business Standard – "Blitzscaling in Times of Uncertainty: Meet Sumit Gupta, CEO CoinDCX" (Aug 2021) : https://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/blitzscaling-in-times-of-uncertainty-meet-sumit-gupta-ceo-coindcx-121081700025_1.html

A detailed business profile highlighting his leadership and CoinDCX's growth trajectory.

Not a trivial mention or an interview—this is a feature story assessing his impact.

Scroll.in – "How Two Long-time College Friends Built India’s First Crypto Unicorn" : https://scroll.in/article/1003237/how-two-long-time-college-friends-built-indias-first-crypto-unicorn

An independent piece covering Sumit’s entrepreneurial journey and the rise of CoinDCX.

Hindu Business Line – "India Must Not Shy Away from Crypto Regulations, Says CoinDCX CEO" : https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/money-and-banking/india-must-not-shy-away-from-crypto-regulations-coindcx-ceo-says/article69100847.ece

Discusses Sumit’s views on regulatory frameworks, positioning him as a thought leader.

Moneycontrol – "Regulation on Offshore Crypto Exchanges to Drive Volumes for Indian Peers: Sumit Gupta of CoinDCX" : https://www.moneycontrol.com/technology/regulation-on-offshore-crypto-exchanges-to-drive-volumes-for-indian-peers-sumit-gupta-of-coindcx-article-12755730.html

Features industry insights and expert opinions, not just an interview.

Navbharat Times – "Success Story of Sumit Gupta: IIT Alumni Who Founded CoinDCX Valued at ₹16,000 Cr from a Flat" : https://navbharattimes.indiatimes.com/business/business-news/success-story-of-sumit-gupta-iit-alumni-who-founded-coindcx-valued-16000-cr-from-flat/articleshow/109045249.cms

Recognizes his entrepreneurial journey as an independent case study.

DNA India – "Meet the Man Who Started Business from a Small Flat and Built ₹16,000 Cr Company in 4 Years"  : https://www.dnaindia.com/business/report-meet-man-who-started-business-from-a-small-flat-built-rs-16000-crore-company-in-4-years-he-is-from-3072678#google_vignette

A feature detailing his contribution to the Indian startup ecosystem.

2.⁠ ⁠Quoted as an Industry Expert by Top Media Outlets

Beyond direct coverage, Sumit Gupta is frequently quoted as a credible source on cryptocurrency by major publications:

Times of India – "CoinDCX Co-Founder on Bitcoin Exchange WazirX’s Plan" : https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/coindcx-co-founder-on-bitcoin-exchange-wazirxs-55/45-plan-hate-to-be-saying-this-/articleshow/112126514.cms

Economic Times – "Crypto and High Bourses: Traders Come Up Trumps" : https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/cryptocurrency/crypto-and-high-bourses-traders-come-up-trumps/articleshow/115234343.cms

Business Today – "Coindcx Co-Founder Criticises WazirX’s Recovery Plan" : https://www.businesstoday.in/technology/news/story/utter-nonsense-coindcx-co-founder-criticises-wazirxs-recovery-plan-for-recent-230-million-security-breach-439328-2024-07-29

These are few independent reports where Sumit’s insights shape the discourse, demonstrating his influence in the industry.

3.⁠ ⁠Recognized by Prestigious Organizations

Sumit Gupta has been honored with several independent recognitions, reinforcing his credibility and leadership:

Fortune India 40 Under 40 (2024) : https://www.fortuneindia.com/multimedia/creating-startup-in-crypto-is-difficult-40u40-2024-sumit-gupta-coindcx/118143

Forbes 30 Under 30 : https://www.forbesindia.com/article/30-under-30-2022/icons-30-those-who-just-missed-the-list/73719/1

Hurun Report - Self-made Entrepreneurs of the Millennia : https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/isha-ambani-akash-ambani-ankush-sachdeva-ghazal-alagh-feature-in-huruns-india-under35s-young-entrepreneurs-list/articleshow/113692023.cms

These accolades are awarded independently by reputable organizations with rigorous selection criteria.

Conclusion: Strong Case for Wikipedia Notability

Multiple reliable, independent sources provide in-depth coverage of Sumit Gupta.

Recognized industry expert, frequently quoted in top-tier financial publications.

Recipient of multiple independent awards, reinforcing his credibility.

If Wikipedia editors require additional citations, I can provide more references. However, dismissing his well-documented impact based on a superficial assessment would be misleading.

Would you like more detailed excerpts from these articles to further strengthen the case? Naanioffl (talk) 18:42, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia editors require additional citations, we can provide more references. Who is "we"? This reply also looks like it was created with an LLM. DoubleCross (‡) 20:15, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. That was a grammatical mistake while writing. I have edited the response. Thanks Naanioffl (talk) 04:32, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While Writing, a person may have grammatical mistakes. That was a grammatical mistake while writing. I have edited the response. Thank You. It was not created with an LLM. Hope you understand human errors. Naanioffl (talk) 04:36, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have re structured the article. Hope it is perfect now. Naanioffl (talk) 15:33, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bob Avakian (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Revolutionary Communist Party, USA (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Rise Up 4 Abortion Rights (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• LimeorLemon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

User seems to be a member of the RCPUSA, given their continuous editing of the past three articles to remove sourced allegations of the organization being a cult over the past two months. Did not reply to a question I asked on their talk page of being associated with the organization. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 01:36, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

VTrail (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Markiyan Kamysh (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This user is insisting on adding an absurd amount of promotional content about a book to the article about its author, and is edit-warring over my removal of that excessive promotional content. They have not replied to my COI notice on their talk page. Jay8g [V•T•E] 17:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am only restoring what you have groundlessly deleted. What you call "promotional material" is only a statement of facts. It is what it is. If you open, for example, an article about another writer, Ian McEwan, the presentation will be the same, with quotes from reviews, etc. 213.55.220.212 (talk) 17:55, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is presented in the same way as the "Writing" section about Elena Ferrante, the "Career" section in the article about Kazuo Ishiguro etc because there are great reviews from authoritative sources. Just like in this case. It is what it is. VTrail (talk) 11:59, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@VTrail: sure the book has some great reviews but why are you including them in the author's article? Reception for the book already covers this. Hand picking passing quotes in newspaper articles can be interesting. The Guardian does say the novel is "remarkable" (right above their link for you to buy a copy through them) but it also says Kamysh is "strange". Better include both, right?

Avoid editing while logged out if that's you (maybe you have technical difficulties with your tech?), I don't know how @Norton1666 fits in to all of this either. Stop editing the page. Discuss on the talk page. Commander Keane (talk) 14:29, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I didn't realise that VTrail has been blocked for 72 hours and the IP for a week. I have warned Norton1666. Commander Keane (talk) 14:39, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

VTrail, you submitted the photo of Kamysh included on the article page, and listed it as your own work. Can you please clarify your relationship with/connection to Kamysh? BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 00:48, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Raffles Design Institute (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Zaf8888 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Zaf8888 had been exclusively editing Raffles Design Institute and after YesI'mOnFire placed a COI notice on Zaf8888's talkpage, Zaf8888 mentioned on YesI'mOnFire's talkpage, Hi Sir, we wish to check about the content, which likely indicate multiple editors behind a single user account or Zaf8888 is being directed to edit the article. I have put a statement on Zaf8888's talkpage on COI editor as a followup to YesI'mOnFire's COI notice approximately a month ago.

Attempts had been made by Zaf8888 to remove incidents (not necessary harmful to the article, see here and here.) ~ JASWE (talk) 08:54, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that COIN notice had been placed by me and removed by Zaf8888. ~ JASWE (talk) 09:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to just another wikieditor 41.144.67.44 (talk) 06:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to 41.144.67.44 41.144.67.44 (talk) 06:05, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• George Demos (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• FemkeHocker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Femke3314 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

There are two similarly-named WP:SPAs that have only edited George Demos solely for the purpose of scrubbing unflattering content and adding promotional text. Would it also make sense to request a CheckUser here to see if a sock situation is happening? Amigao (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Michael Mealling (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Mmealling (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Possible conflict of interest. JacktheBrown (talk) 16:39, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JacktheBrown: Please notify Mmealling of this discussion as required in this noticeboard. As noted at the top of this page and in the edit notice for this page, you can use {{subst:coin-notice}} if you'd like.

And have you had any discussion with this editor? ElKevbo (talk) 18:28, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ElKevbo: see here and here. JacktheBrown (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Lloyd Scott (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Lloydscottmbe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• LukeEScott4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

The above editors are claiming to be the subject and his son. They are attempting to police the article, see this edit summary and this post on my talk page. Additional eyes welcome. GiantSnowman 18:21, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• 129.138.182.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

IP registered to New Mexico Tech repeatedly adding promotional, copyrighted content about their school.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 16:23, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone else please look at [10] to see if you agree that the language is unsuitably promotional? Joyous! Noise! 14:23, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, promotional, and also unsupported. -- Pemilligan (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IP has now accepted they must abide by our policies. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:07, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For the interested, article I just found. I can't link it, apparently techbullion.com is blacklisted, but you'll find it if you want. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Andrew Kosove (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Broderick Johnson (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Alconite (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This user has directly stated that they work for Kosove's company and seems to think that they have ownership over the article.[11][12] They have not responded to multiple talk page inquiries. There was a previous COIN discussion about this user in December, 2024, but no action was taken at that time. For any admins reviewing this issue, there was also some sock puppet-like IP editing around the last time that this editor was active, so a temporary IP editing ban may be called for.[13][14] Vegantics (talk) 15:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added Broderick Johnson. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:57, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• David A. Andelman (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Daandelman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• DavidAndelman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

• Carmel Adventist College (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
• Dianatris (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

This editor formerly edited under User:Carmel Adventist College, they were blocked for their name. They quickly came back under another username. Catfurball (talk) 23:47, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing the conflict of interest. Being a single-purpose account isn't necessarily a conflict. The user said they're a former student there, which also isn't necessarily a conflict. Is there more to it? -- Pemilligan (talk) 02:45, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]