Talk:Andrew Forbes

Note to previous AfDs
Both previous AfDs have been about different people and neither about the current article subject.  Velella  Velella Talk 09:17, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

Content policy violation
Hello, this page is about me, so I have a COI and am therefore not able to edit it myself. However, the flag placed this week by Melcous doesn't have any supporting information; I am not sure how I should go about disputing this accusation but hope a more experienced Wikipedian can help! I have no connection to the (now deleted) user who made this page (and lives on the other side of the world) so don't feel it's appropriate that this flag has been placed without being explained.

Thanks, Andrew Pianody (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , as the editor who added the Undisclosed paid tag, would you mind explaining what lead you to believe this article may have been created by a paid editor? I do see that FinalFrontier.003 was a paid editor, but this article is not on the list that was on his userpage at one time.  I also see that FinalFrontier.003 has been blocked for sockpuppetry, and that there were concerns about undisclosed paid editing.  That said, this article doesn't seem promotional or in need of clean up.  What are your specific concerns here? ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 19:30, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If it wasn't FinalFrontier who spurred Melcous' suspicion of UPE, I'd venture that BroomWhisk's edits eventually would. A 3-hour-old account suddenly adding information to an obscure article using the personal tone of a first-name basis — ("In October 2014, Andrew was appointed as Director of Music of Glasgow Cathedral") — I've seen plenty of articles edited by associates of subjects who add information which refers to those subjects using their first name. Those circumstances are naturally suspicious.  Spintendo  20:10, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, the tag was originally added as part of a large group of articles written by a group of editors who have been banned for sock puppetry and undisclosed paid editing. My initial purpose was to flag it as part of that group, and if other independent editors later checked the article thoroughly and were happy that the content was not compromised, it could and would be removed. I take 's point however that there are probably conflict of interest questions about the recent editing too. Melcous (talk) 21:52, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, and , thanks for your responses (and sorry not to get back to you sooner). I understand Melcous's reason for adding the flag, but had been wondering if it's possible for someone to either resolve/remove those conflicting edits (or the entire page itself) rather than the flag remaining forever? Thanks, Pianody (talk) 15:04, 9 September 2021 (UTC)