This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography Start‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is currently undergoing a peer review. Russia Start‑class Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles Start This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

I'd like to suggest adding a new template to this talk page, something like:

This will replace the connected contributor template. The text "may be personally connected" is no longer valid, as the personal connection is now confirmed.

This will replace the COI template. The text "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject" is no longer valid, as the close connections are now confirmed.

Thanks.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     07:10, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not sure yet what to do about the contributions from users from before 2010.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     18:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As there have been no comments on this from others, and if there are no objections, in a few days I will remove the article COI tag, in favour of declared COI's on this talk page. Thanks.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     12:20, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there's concern about COI/Advertising and whatnot, but I'm curious when the Wikipedia Experts thing will be notable for this biography. I'm sure that this press release won't make it so, but perhaps this DigitalTrends article comes close. Ocaasi (talk) 05:58, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some notes:

• The company in question changed their name recently. The name listed in the Digital Trends article is correct.
• Mediabistro.com published a WebNewser entry, but it is a very short mention, mostly just quotes from the press release listed above.

No comment on company notability in regards to inclusion on this biography article.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     11:04, 22 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Published yesterday, this article in fins.com is related.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     22:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we've crossed the threshold yet. Is that article part of a neutral news service, or is it paid-for promotional content by a user of the site? BTW, I find your exceedingly careful disclosure and attempts to follow policy refreshing. You are setting a high bar for other paid editors to match. Ocaasi (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. See FINS.com for more information on the site. I don't know the exact origin of the article, but could check.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     23:36, 6 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Published today, this article in The Economist also mentions the company.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     19:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Published today, this article in El Mercurio (major newspaper in Chile) also mentions the company. (Spanish language)     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     21:58, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per above, inclusion of company founded by the subject of this article. For lead paragraph:

In 2010, he established WikiExperts.us, a Wikipedia services firm.[1][2][3]

References used:

Thanks.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     17:10, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the autobiography tag that states "This article appears to be an autobiography. Pages that have been extensively edited by the subject or an institution related to the subject may not conform to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy." In this case of this article, appears is not appropriate, as the connection of both the subject and related institutions are confirmed.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     12:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The template no longer reads "appears." THF (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any change to the article that you or other editors wish to make that the COI editor(s) is/are resisting? If not, then none of the tags apply, because the current version reflects Wikipedia consensus and policy. The COI tag is there when there are problems with the article because an editor with a conflict of interest is resisting Wikipedia policy, not to punish good-faith editors who are participating appropriately. THF (talk) 13:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. You're the one with the conflict of interest. (That wasn't entirely clear at COIN.) Where possible, please add URLs to the references in the article so that it is easier for a neutral editor to verify claims made. Let me know at COIN or on my talk page when this has happened, and I'll edit/sign off on the article. THF (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Yes, I am one of the conflicted editors helping with this article. Sorry it wasn't clear on COIN (beyond that it was a self-reported notice). In general, I think this article still needs some NPOV cleanup, and better inline referencing will help with that.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (code of ethics)     13:33, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the article per Wikipedia:Avoid_peacock_terms#Puffery, and was unable to find any major puffery. Previous edits have already improved the article in that respect. NPOV seems ok, but a better review of the references will help know more. I am a bit concerned with the word 'empire' in the lead, perhaps that can be rewritten.

I'll next be helping with better referencing. Already updated a few of the old cites that didn't have URLs, and added a bunch more. These will be sorted and better inline refs used.

I've removed the {{autobiography}} and {{peacock}} tags, and replaced with an {{underconstruction}} tag while the cleanup is in process. Thanks.     Eclipsed   (talk)   (COI Declaration)     12:45, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]