(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 84: | Line 84: | ||
:I am not a paid editor and never have been. You continue to make random attacks against me. Crazy. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 06:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
:I am not a paid editor and never have been. You continue to make random attacks against me. Crazy. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 06:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
||
: and for what it's worth, the section in which I made the edit, is about what to do if you encounter what you believe to be, or what is declared as, conflicted editing by another editor. your objection makes no sense. and in any case slimvirgin already made an edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AConflict_of_interest&type=revision&diff=700877201&oldid=700747863 here] about an hour before you wrote your comment above, and better incorporated what i did. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 06:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
: and for what it's worth, the section in which I made the edit, is about what to do if you encounter what you believe to be, or what is declared as, conflicted editing by another editor. your objection makes no sense. and in any case slimvirgin already made an edit [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AConflict_of_interest&type=revision&diff=700877201&oldid=700747863 here] about an hour before you wrote your comment above, and better incorporated what i did. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 06:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
||
::That being said, it is not wise for an editor with a COI to edit this guideline directly. [[User:AlbinoFerret|<span style="color:white; background-color:#534545; font-weight: bold; font-size: 90%;">AlbinoFerret</span>]] 15:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC) |
|||
:::There is no one on the planet who has no potential COI in Wikipedia. The question is whether a person edit articles where they have one. I don't. [[User:Jytdog|Jytdog]] ([[User talk:Jytdog|talk]]) 03:17, 22 January 2016 (UTC) |
Revision as of 03:17, 22 January 2016
Sources on conflict of interest
- (chronological)
- Michael Davis, "Conflict of Interest," Business and Professional Ethics Journal, 1(4), 1982, pp. 17–27 (influential)
- Luebke, Neil R. "Conflict of Interest as a Moral Category," Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 6, 1987, pp. 66–81. JSTOR 27799930 (influential)
- Michael Davis, "Conflict of Interest Revisited," Business & Professional Ethics Journal, 12(4), Winter 1993, pp. 21–41. JSTOR 27800924
- Michael Davis, Andrew Stark (eds.). Conflict of Interest in the Professions, University of Oxford Press, 2001.
- Andrew Stark, Conflict of Interest in American Public Life, Harvard University Press, 2003.
- Sheldon Krimsky, "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.
- Bernard Lo and Marilyn J. Field (eds.), Conflict of Interest in Medical Research, Education, and Practice, National Academies Press, 2009.
- Wayne Norman, Chris McDonald, "Conflicts of Interest", in George G. Brenkert, Tom L. Beauchamp (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Business Ethics, Oxford University Press, 2012, pp. 441–470.
a question
"Any external relationship – personal, religious, political, academic, financial or legal – can trigger a COI." Does this mean one should not edit about the topic of their expertise? Or theories they lecture on universities? 212.200.65.127 (talk) 14:45, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
- @212.200.65.127: No it does not. Expert editors are welcome, but self-promotion is not. Citing your own work for instance is permitted as long as it is relevant, balanced, and in line with other policies. See advice for Expert editors and Wikipedia editing for research scientists. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
Discrepancy?
It seems there is a discrepancy between how this page is presented and what is talked about on the template:coi page. I feel it is unclear because of this discrepancy when an editor should and should not use the coi tag.
L1R5M1 (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
What to do, if you suspect a COI?
I added content in this dif to answer that - the guideline provided no guidance as to what users should do in that situation. Jytdog (talk) 19:44, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Jdog drafting "If concerns about COI remain..."
(edit conflict)Jdog added this to the COI rules "If concerns about COI remain after considering these other options, raise the issue in a civil manner on the editor's talk page, citing this guideline, or open a thread on WP:COIN." I asked him to discuss on talk. at a minimum he should open the thread. furthermore, he ignored the flag which states "Editors discussing proposed changes to WP:COI or related pages should disclose during those discussions whether they have been paid to edit Wikipedia."
of course buddy Roxythedog re-reverts me (minutes later, nothing else to do) in the well known tag team -edit warring manner, that brought jdog to ARbcom in the first place. I CLEARLY wrote to discuss. Rdog you are wrong. your tactic to push and WP:BAIT with your aggressive behavior is a shame and known to everyone. --Wuerzele (talk) 19:55, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Still waiting for you to explain Jytdogs alleged COI per your, and my, edsum. -Roxy the dog™ woof 20:00, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I was busy replying the WP:hounding Jdog on my talk page (where he posts though not allowed) so he beat me with his above post facto entry! And he is not discussing here!
Jdog knows the rules and how to manipulate them, and here is an immediate example: discussing a controversial issue POST facto, after someone tells him to.--Wuerzele (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
- Still waiting for you to explain Jytdogs alleged COI per your, and my, edsum. -Roxy the dog™ woof 11:15, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- Several editors accused Jytdog of COI a few months ago, he identified to a neutral admin who confirmed that he had no COI. I can not remember where the thread is but Jytdog can likely point you to it. Wuerzele should really retract their accusation unless they have evidence else they are simply making a personal attack. JbhTalk 13:17, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
- really? and you jhunley should really retract if you "cannot remember where the thread" is. have jdog produce it. you assume bad faith fabricating a WP:PA. --Wuerzele (talk) 05:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- It is in plain sight on my user page. User:Jytdog#Self-initiated_COI_Investigation. You have still have not supported your allegation, and you have been asked now by three people. Jytdog (talk) 05:22, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- @Wuerzele:, it is a personal attack to allege that someone has a paid-editing COI without providing any reason, evidence or other proof of COI. I may take this to the dramaboards since you are persisting in tendentious and disruptive discussion. Jbhunley said "
I can not remember where the thread is but Jytdog can likely point you to it.
" preempting your comment of "you jhunley (sic) should really retract if you "cannot remember where the thread" is. have jdog (sic) produce it.
At any rate, Jytdog has provided the link and a direct link to the self-investigation can be seen here, at the COI/N archives, which found Jytdog to be COI-free. Unless you have proof Wuerzele, you are essentially continuing with your ArbCom-found battleground mentality and incivility, which may require Admin intervention at the dramaboard. Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 05:42, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- really? and you jhunley should really retract if you "cannot remember where the thread" is. have jdog produce it. you assume bad faith fabricating a WP:PA. --Wuerzele (talk) 05:09, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- I am still waiting to hear what reason(/s) or evidence Wuerzele had for alleging that Jytdog has a paid-editing COI? Is there any? Cheers, Doctor Crazy in Room 102 of The Mental Asylum 04:47, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- oh you too waiting ? drcrazy! have you had any dealings with jdog ? no ? how about checking him out before writing, while waiting ? he used to run COIN, shouldnt he know better to disclose? but then he wrote half the rules here. read teh arbcomGMOcase evidence page about him.--Wuerzele (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
discussing the edit Jdog made
so, since everyone has had it all out on me, all the accusations of malice out of the way , i invite the esteemed editors (except rdog) to discuss jdog's edit. content, yes! the content that s still in , men!
I reverted it because
- jdog has a COI since AT LEAST October 2015, not declared it formally,. he wasnt sure what to do as he admits. he added the sentence to the COI guidelines which is crazy. you dont edit guidelines that pertain to you r situation. How does this look, gentlemen? You should ask jdog to retract his edit! instead you let rdog bully me and chime in without thinking.
- jdog has QUIETLY started a disclosure on his talkpage, today. NOT HERE as the guidelines, I cited "Editors discussing proposed changes to WP:COI or related pages should disclose during those discussions whether they have been paid to edit Wikipedia."
- jdog SHOULD have discussed on talk BEFORE making a controversial edit like that. Its a standard rule. and he should discuss here ! why are none of you asking him? pretty obvious to me....
the problem I have with his sentence is that it puts the burden on other editors to "raise the issue/prosecute", not on the editor that knows they may be in conflict brushing the law.
I am asking for input by people that edit this page like slimvirgin, Jusdafax, smallbones and I forget who else is usually here, oh Viriditas.--Wuerzele (talk) 05:46, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- I am not a paid editor and never have been. You continue to make random attacks against me. Crazy. Jytdog (talk) 06:14, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- and for what it's worth, the section in which I made the edit, is about what to do if you encounter what you believe to be, or what is declared as, conflicted editing by another editor. your objection makes no sense. and in any case slimvirgin already made an edit here about an hour before you wrote your comment above, and better incorporated what i did. Jytdog (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
- That being said, it is not wise for an editor with a COI to edit this guideline directly. AlbinoFerret 15:33, 21 January 2016 (UTC)