Talk:Ken Banks

What is this article about?
Currently this article is headed as a bio of Ken Banks, but the information within it relates far more to company and software he is involved in. This also applies to the few cites provided. So it looks like Ken Banks is not notable, while the company and software may be. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 09:08, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Moving section on Frontline SMS
Should the section on FrontlineSMS be in its own page? Tallesttrees (talk) 21:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ken Banks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.unfoundation.com/press-center/press-releases/2009/technologists-join-development-and-health-experts.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820060947/http://www.receiver.vodafone.com/20-africas-grassroots to http://www.receiver.vodafone.com/20-africas-grassroots

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:30, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add category
Please add the category removing ":" before category to activate it. This change is following Banks' degree. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 15:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I don't believe Mr. Banks has an Anthro degree, but please correct me if I'm wrong.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   19:56, 14 January 2018 (UTC)


 * According to the Univ of Sussex, he has the equivalent of an undergraduate degree in Social Anthropology, which is not the same as having a doctorate in the discipline. I believe that the category British social scientists, being a vague and non-specific term, is a much more appropriate category to choose in this case. I won't make the requested addition to the Anthropologist category, but I'll leave the template open for another editor to, if they wish. Regards,  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   20:30, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, please add British social scientists. Thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 04:17, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅   Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   18:10, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
 * thank you. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 17:01, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Minor edit to lead section
Please make this minor edit to the lead section. Banks has been technology/business consultant since 2006. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

Added.   Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   22:14, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * thank you for making these edits. However, now the "keynote speaker" part is missing. Please add. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 10:09, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
 * As 's edit summary says, the opening sentence now matches the infobox, which lists occupations. "Keynote speaker" is not an occupation, and is essentially a meaningless description and verging on WP:PUFFERY, so I would agree that it should not be included. Melcous (talk) 10:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Article update
Please make the following changes to the article at "FrontlineSMS" and "Awards and fellowships" sections. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Reply 10-OCT-2018
When ready to proceed with the requested references kindly open a new edit request at your earliest convenience. Regards,  Spintendo   20:45, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) The provided reference does not state that the subject was appointed Visiting Fellow of the Cambridge Judge Business School per se. It states only that he was appointed Visiting Fellow, but not where. A quote from the subject states that the Cambridge Judge Business School was planning to "take up the reigns and design a new Masters Program around Social Innovation" but this is the extent of what is said about this business relationship. If the subject was appointed Visiting Fellow, there ought to be a press release made specifically for that announcement. That would be the most appropriate reference to use for this claim.
 * 2) Likewise, the claim regarding the position at Yoti should originate from Yoti, and would only be included if Yoti were notable, as determined through the appearance of a Wikipedia article on the startup.

Article update
Please make the following changes to the article at "FrontlineSMS" and "Awards and fellowships" sections clarifying that as of October 2018 Ken Banks was a Visiting Fellow at Cambridge Judge Business School. There is also another link at the Social innovators section of the business school website stating that Ken Banks is a Visiting Fellow at this business school that could be used as a reference. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:01, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Reply 22-OCT-2018
Regards,  Spintendo   20:17, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
 * This claim was placed in the Career section only. The table does not otherwise specify that visiting fellowships apply in its inclusion rubric.
 * Thank you for implementing the edit. Please move it to the end of the career section, as the last phrase after "initiatives acting as an advisor and mentor". You currently placed it after 2003-2004 which is probably not the best place for a 2018 fact. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 21:09, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

I have placed it at the end of the Career section, just before the Frontline SMS subsection which continues through to the end of the parent section (Career). Since the added Visiting fellowship is unrelated to Frontline SMS, it doesn't belong under that subheading. If there are later career events placed under the Frontline SMS subheading then it may be that the Frontline SMS subheader is misapplied, as shown below, per MOS:BADHEAD: '''
 * Level 2 content (Career)
 * Level 3 content (Frontline SMS)
 * Level 2 content (Publications)
 * Level 2 content (Publications)

Please advise.  Spintendo   09:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Dear I realize that it was a page structure problem so I restructured the article following this editing guideline that says : making totally uncontroversial updates like removing typos, correcting or updating simple data, and removing blatant vandalism is fine (thus saving your time and effort0. If you feel that these edits somehow contradict with the strict COI editing policies, feel free to revert them. I will make a new editing request if needed. -- Bbarmadillo (talk) 20:25, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Approached about COI edits
I was approached on a freelance writer web site by a man using the name "Nikolai Fedyanin" about performing an edit to this article in violation of COI in return for a sum of $35. Before I engaged with the person who approached me, I informed an administrator via Discord and appended this to my userpage.

I asked the user for the article and the wikicode and at no time did I accept payment or agree to edit the article. I was provided these instructions. I informed the user about WP:COI and WP:PAID and admonished him for attempting this. He told me that it "needed to be done" and "understood how Wikipedia works". I subsequently blocked the user on social media. The Pony Toast 🍞 (Talk) 19:53, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Edit request: Help clearing warnings and correcting my page
Hello, I've been in touch the Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team about this page, who suggested I add this to Talk.

A while back I was approached by an editor offering to help update my Wikipedia page (which had been around for a while, but which had not been updated for some time). I had never considered having this done, but he said it would be done as per the regulations and that he would declare that he was being paid to do the work. I am not a Wikipedia expert by any stretch, but did see a declaration so thought everything would be okay.

Somewhere along the line, he invited someone else to make changes to my page and that person reported his approach. A warning then appeared on my page - you can see what happened on this Talk page. In my efforts to get the page sorted out and the warning removed, I ended up making things worse by approaching another editor who, a few weeks ago, seems to have fallen foul of Wikipedia and had all or most of his changes reversed. He also said he would do things according to the Wikipedia rules and regulations.

As it currently stands the page has the 'paid' warning, and is not fully accurate. This version, here, contains all of the correct and up-to-date information:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ken_Banks&oldid=940917177

Could someone please help get the page tidied up? Hopefully everything here makes sense.

Thank you.

Kenkiwanja (talk) 19:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I see you reverted the page back in March and added a tag. Just curious: if you removed the problematic edits, seemingly put in by BeeTheBestThatYouCanBEE, then why should the tag be necessary? And if so how would it get removed? Its not like a "citations needed" tag where all you would need to do is add more cites, you know? Anyway this request is going to be per WP:EDITREQ; please do not use this template to make general requests,  but format it in a "change X to Y" manner with a reliable source. Thank you.  Donna Spencer talk-to-me ⛅ 14:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Donna. Apologies for my mistake - the workings of Wikipedia are new to me, to say the least. I'll get onto requesting the edits as you suggest. In the meantime, I'll keep an eye out for a response from . I'd love to see the tag removed as a starting point. Thank you. Kenkiwanja (talk) 19:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
 * DonSpencer1, I didn't add the tag but reverted edits by an undisclosed paid editor, and my revert restored the tag which was originally added by as per the ANI thread. The subject of this article has a long history of hiring freelancers to promote the page as well as to remove the tag so imo, it must stay, till someone with no COI took over. Thank you.  GSS &#x202F;&#128172; 15:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree, the tag is accurate and should stay until someone unconnected is able to thoroughly review the article and its references and ensure that it conforms to WP:NPOV. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
 * GSS Thanks for your reply. I'm happy to hold my hand up here but don't think it's fair to say I have a 'long history' with this. I was approached by an editor, hired him in good faith, and got let down. My biggest mistake was hiring someone else - again in good faith - to sort it out. Hopefully, as per yours and 's suggestions, someone independent will have time to take a look at the page and help tidy it up, as per your guidelines, which is something I've always been keen to follow. Thanks. Kenkiwanja (talk) 19:52, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Clean-up done
Hello! Ken Banks asked my help with this article and I thought it was way too long and contained a lot of irrelevant information. It is hard to evaluate which is important and which isn't but here's my suggestion, a lot simplier than the one on live currently:. Jjanhone (talk) 19:34, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
 * This week the article has been cut from 27Kb to 19.5Kb. The size of the article was 35Kb once the warning was added. Is it good enough already? All the paid edits has been disclosed now and the article has been cleaned so can the warning tag now be removed? Ping Joe, GSS, DonSpencer1, Sam-2727, Smartse. Jjanhone (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * , as I've said before, your best chance on getting a useful response is to make a formal Sam-2727 (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Testing


 * Information to be added or removed: Remove the warning tag
 * Explanation of issue: There are no undisclosed paid editors on this article anymore as all three has been disclosed. Also the cleanup part ("It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies. (February 2019)") should be now ok, as the article size has reduced from 35 Kb to under 20 Kb.
 * References supporting change: see the diff
 * Jjanhone (talk) 07:39, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

pinging who originally added the UPE tag to the page in 2019.  Seagull123  Φ  14:07, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * The purpose of the tag is to highlight that, because the article has been edited by someone with a financial COI in the subject, it needs to be checked for neutrality and other content problems. By definition, I think "cleanup" attempts by another paid editor (who based on the section above was probably hired specifically to get rid of this tag) cannot address this. Case in point – found poorly sourced, promotional material that needed to be removed after this edit request was made. The article and the sources need a detailed review by an unconnected editor before we can be sure it's clear of these problems. I'd therefore suggest declining this request until that happens. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 14:19, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * - I second what Joe Roe says above. Simply reducing the length of an article does not demonstrate that it now meets WP:NPOV. Is "Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts (2012).[24][25]" worth including? It seems as if anyone can nominate themselves. Likewise is "In March 2018, Banks was appointed Visiting Fellow at Cambridge Judge Business School[30]." important? Do we need to know who wrote forewords to his books? Are there any reliable sources which actually discuss those books and their content (there aren't currently)? The awards section should be incorporated into the main text and they should only be included if there are secondary sources that are independent of the award-giving organisation. SmartSE (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your concrete suggestions! Here's my diff again. I hope someone not connected has time and interest to check the case further. :) I know the size of the article is not proving it's good now but at least it's telling that a lot of content has been removed. The size is now under 12Kb. Jjanhone (talk) 15:36, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Those were examples, not an exhaustive list. SmartSE (talk) 18:14, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
 * I did remove more than you suggested. :) Jjanhone (talk) 18:21, 7 September 2020 (UTC)


 * I tried to clean this up to the point that the tag could be removed but I gave up. There didn't seem to be much in the way of good sources. The prestigious publications tended to briefly mention Banks while most of the details were coming from interviews (note Interviews) or self-published material. The whole thing just came apart at the seams when I tried to fix it. Banks may be notable but if someone wants to write an article about him I'd suggest starting again from the ground up. Haukur (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your efforts here,, but I'm surprised that a page that's been on Wikipedia for almost 12 years could now be suddenly deemed 'not notable'. Would it not make sense to revert back to the last page before the paid editing issues arose, remove the tag (given no paid edits were made up to that point) and then let someone else decide if they want to undertake a tidy up? Given you gave up on the page, it only seems fair to give someone else a chance. This redirect seems pretty drastic and means it will no longer be visible to anyone who might read it and decide to make changes/do a review. Thanks. Kenkiwanja (talk) 14:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying you're necessarily not notable - I haven't looked into that in enough detail to really tell one way or the other. I often find it quite difficult to determine the notability of businesspeople. I also haven't taken any sort of admin action - any editor is welcome to revert my redirect and have a go at this. At your suggestion, I've now looked into the oldest versions of the article and I still think it would be a better idea to start over than to use those. I think identifying WP:THREE high-quality, independent sources and summarizing those might be a reasonable way to start. Haukur (talk) 14:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the response,, and your efforts to help move things forward (you'll have seen the challenges I've had with this). You're right on some of the referencing, and some awards (for example) don't seem to 'qualify' despite coming from organisations such as National Geographic and Cambridge University. I'm happy to help find the best references that might meet Wikipedia guidelines, but don't know if I'm allowed to do that. Kenkiwanja (talk) 17:03, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to make suggestions. Haukur (talk) 19:11, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm more than happy to do that. Where would be the best place to share this? I have previously been in touch with the Wikipedia Volunteer Response Team via email, so have that, else I could post to the Talk page here. What would work best, and meet guidelines? Thanks so much, Haukur. Kenkiwanja (talk) 10:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * This talk page is the most natural place. Haukur (talk) 10:26, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, I just need help accessing the page as it currently stands. I can no longer see it because of the redirect. How do I get around that? Thanks. Kenkiwanja (talk) 08:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You can access every version here: Haukur (talk) 11:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

I am marking this edit request as "declined". Thank you to all the editors who contributed to the discussion. Since redirected the page, there are no edits to Ken Banks to consider at this moment. if you would like to recreate the article and propose changes please follow the instructions at Template:Request edit/Instructions and submit a new ticket. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Z1720 (talk) 03:31, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks Z1720. I think this makes most sense and I'll do as instructed. Echoing your thanks to other editors for their help. Kenkiwanja (talk) 10:27, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Revised links for article
Following a recent conversation on this page with I've done my best to source better, applicable links for the article. I'm not sure the best way to share or display these, so will put them in a simple list below. The number represents the existing reference. In some cases I've listed more than one if I've not been sure which might be best. Where reference numbers are skipped, I believe the existing reference is acceptable. If there is a better way of requesting these references be reviewed, please let me know.

[1]	https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/real-world-geography-ken-banks/; https://www.ashoka.org/en-us/fellow/ken-banks; https://www.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131120-ken-banks-reluctant-innovator-social-change/

[2]	https://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/resources/frontline-sms/

[4]	https://www.idgconnect.com/article/3582025/ken-banks-interview-technology-for-social-good.html

[5]	https://blogs.worldbank.org/edutech/using-mobile-phones-to-collect-data; https://www.theguardian.com/society/katineblog/2009/may/22/mobile-phone-technology

[6]	https://www.britishcouncil.org/anyone-anywhere/explore/web-for-all/humanitarian-projects-africa; https://blogs.windows.com/devices/2008/12/01/taking-things-a-whole-lot-further-in-africa/

[8]	https://www.theguardian.com/katine/katine-chronicles-blog/2010/jan/14/mobile-phones-africa

[9]	https://www.forbes.com/sites/ashoka/2012/06/20/how-ken-banks-built-a-startup-one-text-message-at-a-time/?sh=51d780ef6db5; https://reliefweb.int/report/cambodia/using-text-messaging-weapon-malaria-war; https://www.iftf.org/future-now/article-detail/congratulations-to-sms-texting-pioneer-ken-banks-mobile-health-wouldnt-be-the-same-without-him/; https://cyber.harvard.edu/node/94474; https://www.openhealthnews.com/story/2014-11-30/ken-banks-and-frontlinesms-how-reluctant-innovators-offer-hope-world; https://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/kiwanjanet-launches-the-new-frontlinesms/ [10]	http://ictafrica.ning.com/profiles/blogs/interview-with-ken-banks; https://cddrl.fsi.stanford.edu/multimedia/mobile-technology-empowering-grassroots; https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/spreading-message/

[13]	https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2010-08-23-frontlinesms-mass-communication-where-the-internet-ends/ ; https://ibe-infocus.org/articles/questions-and-answers-with-ken-banks/

[16]	https://nextbillion.net/if-you-can-only-read-one-book-on-social-innovation/

I'd greatly appreciate any help clarifying whether or not these links are helpful, and acceptable, in order for the page to be brought up to a better standard and the redirect and tags removed. Thank you. Kenkiwanja (talk) 18:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Kenkiwanja, you can check your references against our list of reliable (and unreliable sources) at WP:RSP. You have several sites listed so it's difficult to go through each one and determine if it's reliable. I suggest reading WP:RS to understand of what we consider reliable. In general, blogs are usually considered unreliable and should be avoided.
 * I suggest using reliable sources to create a draft of your proposed edit in your sandbox (click me!). Once you are ready, follow the instructions at Template:Request edit/Instructions and post a link to your sandbox. This will let editors know what you want the article to look like. Please post any questions you have below and happy editing! Z1720 (talk) 02:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi Z1720. Thanks again for your help with everything so far. I've finally managed to do as requested, and have put together a draft page which I hope better meets Wikipedia's requirements on content, referencing, etc. You can read that page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kenkiwanja/sandbox - I'm happy to add links to internal Wikipedia pages where relevant, but wanted to first check whether you think this is closer to what you need. Thanks! Kenkiwanja (talk) 20:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Upon taking a quick view at your draft, it looks like you have some reliable sources. I suggest using wikicode to embed your citations. This allows editors to quickly add the text into the article. You can read how this is done at Citation templates.
 * In the interest of fairness, I am completing older requests first (some editors have been waiting since October to have their requests assessed!) so I won't assess and implement the request right now. I suggest posting a new request below by following the instructions at Template:Request edit/Instructions. This will put your request in the queue so many editors can see the request. Thanks and let me know if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 20:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response, Z1720. I've gone through and embedded the sources, although I had a problem with just one (which you'll see flagged in the References section). If you have a quick minute to take a look that would be great, then I'll give the page one last look before submitting as per your instructions. Thanks so much. Kenkiwanja (talk) 08:29, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi If the problem was reference 11, I have fixed the issue. If not, post below which reference number was causing the issue. Z1720 (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, that was the one, Z1720. Thanks. I've now gone back through everything and think it all looks okay (hopefully I haven't missed anything). I did look at the next step you suggested (Request Edit) but I'm afraid my knowledge of how Wikipedia works is too limited to follow the instructions - there's a good chance I'll mess something up. Is there another way I can do this? If not I've no problem waiting if you think you can take a look in a few weeks. Thanks again for all your help trying to resolve this. Hopefully we're not far from having it all sorted now. Kenkiwanja (talk) 19:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi I recommend using the request edit template. If something goes wrong an editor will fix the request. Z1720 (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Proposed new text for page
As per recent conversations on this Talk page, I've attempted to provide a clean, shorter and appropriately-cited version of my page. This follows a more recent message exchange with Z1720 who suggested creating a tidied and better sourced version in my Sandbox would make most sense. I'm a real novice at Wikipedia editing so please excuse any issues with how I've compiled this. The same user also suggested I post a new 'Request edit' section here.

The proposed page is at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kenkiwanja/sandbox

I hope I've covered everything, but if not I'm happy to re-edit or comment or revise in order to help get to a stage where we have a new page that is acceptable to you. Thanks so much. Kenkiwanja (talk) 19:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, that still doesn't contain multiple (2-3), reliable sources that provide in-depth coverage. The National Geographic ones are the best, but this one is a self-published source (see Opinions are those of the blogger and/or the blogger's organization, and not necessarily those of the National Geographic Society and another is a careers resource for schools. Wired is good but it's about FrontlineSMS rather than a biographical piece. The Jersey Evening Post is pretty brief and again, the main subject is FrontlineSMS. That leaves this as the only decent source providing any biographical detail. In it's current state, much of the article content would need to be removed as it's primary sourced. I think the best idea would be to merge anything relevant into FrontlineSMS. SmartSE (talk) 21:58, 26 January 2021 (UTC)