| Revision as of 00:53, 4 April 2015 editAtsme (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers42,818 edits blank to curb some of the excitement← Previous edit | Revision as of 13:26, 15 April 2015 edit undoBoboMeowCat (talk | contribs)4,152 edits Draft of potential new essay which is substantially different than previous one - trying to provide a starting point to move forwardNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{Essay|WP:COIduck}} | |||
| {{nutshell|This essay is a supplement to ], and is intended to help editors identify certain behavioral patterns which are disruptive to Misplaced Pages and may be associated associated by COI advocacy. {{duck}}}} | |||
| The ]. This essay focuses on users who edit in a manner that suggests financial conflict of interest. During your Misplaced Pages editing, you may encounter fellow editors who appear to engage in POV pushing which favors various businesses or industries, in a manner that leads you to believe they have a conflict of interest with respect to that business or industry. In an anonymous editing environment, it is not always possible to prove or disprove COI editing; However, “COI Ducks” may violate multiple policies and guidelines such as ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ], ] etc. At the end of the day, it is the policy and guideline violations that matter, as this is disruptive to Wikipeida and causes article content to suffer, which can have serious real world effects. In 2015, Wifione, a ] and “COI Duck”, was banned after a long history of fellow editors noting problems with Wifione’s editing. Wifione’s work in maintaining an article on a bogus business school cost unsuspecting students in India significant money. | |||
| ==I think I see a Duck== | |||
| If you think you have spotted a COI Duck, stop and carefully evaluate the situation. It is possible you have misinterpreted things. For example, adding reliably sourced content that is favorable of a pharmaceutical or biotechnology company (or removing poorly sourced information critical of these industries) is not a sign of a COI Duck. This is positive editing behavior in that it is upholding ], ] etc. However, POV pushing in favor of pharmaceutical or biotechnology industries in violation of WP:NPOV, WP:OWN, WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH, WP:CHERRYPICK, WP:EDITWAR, WP:GANG, WP:BULLY, WP:BITE etc may mean you are dealing with a COI Duck. | |||
| ==Possible remedies== | |||
| If you are concerned about COI Ducks on Misplaced Pages, consider adding noticeboards including ] to your watchlist, and when you see editors are calling for a block or topic ban, read the diffs provided and read the relevant talk pages/article histories to see if the evidence really seem to support such action. Chime in if the evidence does not support a topic ban, because ] of ducks may use that method to maintain ]. Other remedies might include things such as if you notice a new editor being bitten by a duck, reach out to him/her and welcome them on their talk page. Direct them to the Teahouse and dispute resolution etc. Advise them that no matter how unreasonable the duck or duckteam seems to get, do not become ] with them, as this will be used against them. | |||
| ==Important reminder== | |||
| Always evaluate your own behavior and the quality of your own edits whenever you suspect you are dealing with a COI Duck. It’s easy to dismiss the problem as being with the other editor. Always be sure you are careful to follow ], otherwise the problem is just as likely to be you. | |||
Revision as of 13:26, 15 April 2015
 | This is an essay. It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints. | Shortcut |
 | This page in a nutshell: This essay is a supplement to Misplaced Pages:Conflicts of interest, and is intended to help editors identify certain behavioral patterns which are disruptive to Misplaced Pages and may be associated associated by COI advocacy.  Looks like a duck to me |
The duck test. This essay focuses on users who edit in a manner that suggests financial conflict of interest. During your Misplaced Pages editing, you may encounter fellow editors who appear to engage in POV pushing which favors various businesses or industries, in a manner that leads you to believe they have a conflict of interest with respect to that business or industry. In an anonymous editing environment, it is not always possible to prove or disprove COI editing; However, “COI Ducks” may violate multiple policies and guidelines such as WP:NPOV, WP:OWN, WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH, WP:CHERRYPICK, WP:EDITWAR, WP:GANG, WP:BULLY, WP:BITE etc. At the end of the day, it is the policy and guideline violations that matter, as this is disruptive to Wikipeida and causes article content to suffer, which can have serious real world effects. In 2015, Wifione, a Misplaced Pages administrator and “COI Duck”, was banned after a long history of fellow editors noting problems with Wifione’s editing. Wifione’s work in maintaining an article on a bogus business school cost unsuspecting students in India significant money.
I think I see a Duck
If you think you have spotted a COI Duck, stop and carefully evaluate the situation. It is possible you have misinterpreted things. For example, adding reliably sourced content that is favorable of a pharmaceutical or biotechnology company (or removing poorly sourced information critical of these industries) is not a sign of a COI Duck. This is positive editing behavior in that it is upholding WP:VERIFY, WP:MEDRS etc. However, POV pushing in favor of pharmaceutical or biotechnology industries in violation of WP:NPOV, WP:OWN, WP:NOR, WP:SYNTH, WP:CHERRYPICK, WP:EDITWAR, WP:GANG, WP:BULLY, WP:BITE etc may mean you are dealing with a COI Duck.
Possible remedies
If you are concerned about COI Ducks on Misplaced Pages, consider adding noticeboards including WP:ANI to your watchlist, and when you see editors are calling for a block or topic ban, read the diffs provided and read the relevant talk pages/article histories to see if the evidence really seem to support such action. Chime in if the evidence does not support a topic ban, because tagteams of ducks may use that method to maintain ownership of articles. Other remedies might include things such as if you notice a new editor being bitten by a duck, reach out to him/her and welcome them on their talk page. Direct them to the Teahouse and dispute resolution etc. Advise them that no matter how unreasonable the duck or duckteam seems to get, do not become uncivil with them, as this will be used against them.
Important reminder
Always evaluate your own behavior and the quality of your own edits whenever you suspect you are dealing with a COI Duck. It’s easy to dismiss the problem as being with the other editor. Always be sure you are careful to follow Misplaced Pages’s policies and guidelines, otherwise the problem is just as likely to be you.