79.188.94.86 (talk) →Ridiculous: new section |
|||
Line 88: | Line 88: | ||
Are there any user boxes or other templates to A) facilitate such disclosure or B) facilitate disclosure of the lack of a need for such disclosure? I think there should be, as well as use instructions here. (I'm also thinking of adding something to my sig, so it would look something like this: --([[WP:Not_a_Paid_Editor|<s>PE</s>]])<span class="nowrap">{{U|[[User:Elvey|Elvey]]}}</span> <sup>([[User talk:Elvey|t]]•[[Special:Contribs/Elvey|c]])</sup> 18:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC) |
Are there any user boxes or other templates to A) facilitate such disclosure or B) facilitate disclosure of the lack of a need for such disclosure? I think there should be, as well as use instructions here. (I'm also thinking of adding something to my sig, so it would look something like this: --([[WP:Not_a_Paid_Editor|<s>PE</s>]])<span class="nowrap">{{U|[[User:Elvey|Elvey]]}}</span> <sup>([[User talk:Elvey|t]]•[[Special:Contribs/Elvey|c]])</sup> 18:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC) |
||
== Ridiculous == |
|||
Ridiculous as administrators can do here (and in other wiki projects) whatever they want without any consequences, Wild West. |
Revision as of 15:25, 10 October 2014
Threads older than 18 days may be archived by lowercase sigmabot III. Search above, or see also the merged page's 2006 archive. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 18 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present. |
Sources on conflict of interest
- Davis, Michael and Stark, Andrew (eds.). Conflict of Interest in the Professions, University of Oxford Press, 2001.
- Krimsky, Sheldon. "The Ethical and Legal Foundations of Scientific 'Conflict of Interest'", in Trudo Lemmings and Duff R. Waring (eds.), Law and Ethics in Biomedical Research: Regulation, Conflict of Interest, and Liability, University of Toronto Press, 2006.
- Lo, Bernard and Field, Marilyn J. (eds.). Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice, National Academies Press, 2009.
- Stark, Andrew. Conflict of Interest in American Public Life, Harvard University Press, 2003.
Approaching editors on their talk pages
I'd like to change this sentence, in the "How to handle conflicts of interest" section:
If an editor directly discloses information that clearly demonstrates that he or she has a COI as defined in this guideline or has made one or more paid contributions as per the Terms of Use, raise the issue with the editor in a civil manner on the editor's Talk page, citing this guideline.
It was added on 11 July. It used to say:
The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline.
That amounts to the same thing, but it allows an editor to discuss the COI issue on whatever page it has been raised, including article talk. Forcing an editor to go to someone's talk page personalizes the issue. We've been talking recently about how certain behavioral policies and guidelines may make women editors feel uncomfortable. This is one of those issues. Women may be even more reluctant than men to start a one-to-one confrontation, especially with an anonymous editor.
There was a discussion on AN/I recently where an editor was told she could not open a discussion about COI elsewhere until she had discussed it with the editor on his talk page, and this part of the guideline was cited to require her to do that.
I'd like to change it to something like:
If you suspect that an editor has a conflict of interest, consider raising it with her first on the article's talk page or on her user talk page. If the suspected COI editing continues, open a section on WP:COIN, following the instructions there.
Are there any objections? SlimVirgin (talk) 22:55, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
- I think that's a good change. I guess a tweak I would make would be to broaden it a little. Let's say someone is engaged in a deletion discussion or policy discussion in which there is a possible COI issue. Then there should be latitude to allow the editor to approach the person on the project talk page or project page, wherever the person will see it. Coretheapple (talk) 00:02, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- Good idea. Perhaps this:
If you suspect that an editor has a conflict of interest, consider raising it directly with her first. You can do this on the talk page of the article, policy or guideline (or wherever the issue has arisen), or on her user talk page. If the suspected COI editing continues, open a section on WP:COIN, following the instructions there.
- SlimVirgin (talk) 00:11, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- The word "suspect" is unduly creepy. How about:
If you think an editor may have a conflict of interest, consider raising it directly with the editor first. You can do that on the talk page of the article, policy or guideline (or wherever the issue has arisen), or on the user's talk page. If COI editing continues, open a section on WP:COIN, following the instructions there.
- I removed "her" because it was easy, but that's just a suggestion—my point is that there is no need for "suspect". Johnuniq (talk) 01:36, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- Hi John, that's fine with me. SlimVirgin (talk) 02:52, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- The word "suspect" is unduly creepy. How about:
- Thanks for the feedback, Core and John. I'll go ahead and make the change. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
- I changed "policy or guideline" to "project page," so the edit was:
If you think an editor may have a conflict of interest, consider raising it directly with the editor first. You can do that on the talk page of the article or project page (or wherever the issue has arisen), or on the user's talk page. If COI editing continues, open a section on WP:COIN, following the instructions there.
- Strongly disagree. The rationale that discussing whether or not an editor has a conflict of interest somewhere other than the user's talk page would avoid "personalizing" the issue is possibly the most absurd notion I've seen on Wikipedia in years. Such a discussion is always personal to the editor targeted by the discussion. It should be on the talk page of the editor who is alleged to have the conflict of interest and absolutely should not be initiated on other talk pages. Risker (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- Wow, SlimVirgin, you changed that paragraph from one addressing known conflicts of interest (i.e., where the editor has already identified that they have a COI) to one where anyone might possibly suspect a COI. Your addition gives carte blanche to ignore the next paragraph of the guideline, which gives instructions on addressing possible or perceived conflicts of interest. In other words, your edit changes the entire thrust of that section. Further, it encourages the use of accusations of COI to deflect attention from valid content disputes and discussions to character assassination of the participants. If you perceive that there may be a conflict of interest, you already know that the right thing to do is to challenge the content or the proposed sources using the existing processes. Risker (talk) 04:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
- Support. Women editors say this will make women editors more comfortable here. So let's do it. Risker: I'm not seeing any constructive criticism here. Are you willing to suggest an alternative edit that would address the expressed concerns of women editors?--{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 18:50, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Userboxes regarding Paid Editing?
Wikimedia's Terms of Use state that "you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation."
Are there any user boxes or other templates to A) facilitate such disclosure or B) facilitate disclosure of the lack of a need for such disclosure? I think there should be, as well as use instructions here. (I'm also thinking of adding something to my sig, so it would look something like this: --(PE){{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 18:40, 3 October 2014 (UTC)
Ridiculous
Ridiculous as administrators can do here (and in other wiki projects) whatever they want without any consequences, Wild West.