Talk:Ibotta

COI editing
The user in question identified as an intern for Ibotta -- I will clean up so it remains neutral. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IboughtaDEN (talk • contribs) 20:29, August 8, 2016 (UTC)


 * There are four different users with a clear COI; two of them have identified as employees of Ibotta (yourself being one of them - thank you for complying with Wikipedia's policies by being open about your affiliation!) Please do not remove the COI tag even if you attempt to clean up the article. Since there are so many accounts involved (a fifth, now, a brand new account which probably tried to remove the COI tag as their first edit but only removed part of it), it is important that an editor who is completely unconnected to the company makes that call. It's no big deal and there is no deadline. --bonadea contributions talk 20:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks-- I'll make sure the intern doesn't adjust it at all and let the cards fall where they lie. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IboughtaDEN (talk • contribs) 20:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

My first time writing Wikipedia. Sorry! Feel free to remove any overly PR like content!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foreverfilm89 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Please assist to avoid conflict of interest and verify sources
Can someone non-related to Ibotta please edit/check references in the next few days? Having a solid wikipedia page really helps with hiring and I want to make sure it complies. I believe I already updated all citations to non-press release and verifiable secondary/media sources. It'd be a huge help. I just want to make sure we comply! Also, once done if you can help remove the banners that would be amazing, but only if you feel you've hit all the right points! IboughtaDEN (talk) 21:48, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Let me review.Patbreckf (talk) 05:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Do I have to remove the request edit if I think I sufficiently addressed the request?Patbreckf (talk) 05:48, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Patbreckf (talk) 05:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Welcome to Wikipedia, User:Patbreckf. It is often a good idea for brand new editors to avoid removing maintenance tags especially concerning neutrality and COI; a company representative disclosed above that the article is intended as a marketing tool for hiring staff, which is completely against the purpose of Wikipedia, and the article has a problematic history with several undisclosed as well as disclosed COI editors. There are still inappropriate sources in the article, and again, as a new editor you can't be expected to know exactly what the policies on sources say, and while your clean-up efforts are appreciated it might have been good to leave the maintenance tags on. You state on your user page that editing this article and one other is your purpose for being on Wikipedia - how did you even find this article on your first day here? --bonadea contributions talk 07:30, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * OK, I've had a look at the article and quite frankly, it needs a lot of work to see which sources meet Wikipedia's policy for reliable sources, which are primary (quite a few of them as far as I can see - anything based on a press release or an interview with the founder counts as a primary source), and to clean out inappropriate buzzwords and marketingspeak (it still talks about "opportunities" and "brand engagement", for instance). Since the article has mostly been worked on by COI editors and the subsequent edits have changed very little, a COI review by an unaffiliated and experienced editor would still be a good idea, I believe, and I don't think I'm the person to do it, so I'll restore the relevant tags. Again, there is absolutely no deadline and it's important that issues like these are resolved thoroughly. --bonadea contributions talk 08:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
 * @Bonadea Unaffiliated editor here (do I dare call myself experienced?) I heavily trimmed the article, which included removing most of the notable dates section. Rationale: it would overkill to include every single instance where Ibotta partnered with a new retailer or was tangentially mentioned in a report. The buzzwords are gone, thanks to an IP editor. What do you think of the article as it stands now? I hope my edits have been improvements. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 03:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks better now. I believe the issue with buzzwords and primary sources to have been fixed, so I have removed the 2 relevant tags. Regards, VB00 (talk) 07:09, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Why "age minimum"...?
I work at a PriceRite supermarket in Connecticut; it is the "discount division" of ShopRite (both chains are within 2 miles or so in my town.) Recently I noticed an Ibotta poster on the PriceRite front window; I was surprised to see the age restriction. I tried to ask why this is so since PriceRite, at least in CT, does not sell age-restricted products. I see some sort of legal action in the future: some shoppers have no intention of purchasing alcoholic beverages even in stores that offer them. 50.79.178.157 (talk) 20:12, 25 October 2016 (UTC)