Talk:Southwestern Advantage/Archives/2019

Clean Up Inaccuracies/Biases
I'm a current employee of this company, and I've noticed that the information describing Southwestern Advantage seems to have clear editorial bias (Doesn't comply with Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View), as well as a lack of information regarding the company. Reading through the material, there are statements that are clearly incorrect, outdated, or irrelevent, and verbage is used consistently throughout the page implying negativity without explanation (All facts and significant points of view on a given subject) or with broken/incorrect sources. [1]

A couple examples: "Students regularly work 72 or more hours per week, almost twice the upper limit imposed by the Fair Labor Standards Act.[4]" Firstly, the statement "almost twice the upper limit imposed by the Fair Labor Standards Act" is irrelevent...considering that independent contractors or business owners aren't held to those standards. All the statement does is imply that individuals are overworked even though they technically work for themselves, which gives negative connotations. Also, the source for that statement is incorrect. Nothing on that page indicates how long students work, nor does it mention the Fair Labor Standards Act.

"According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits. As independent contractors, Southwestern Advantage avoids the Fair Labor Standards Act's mandates for minimum wage or overtime pay.[9]" This statement is irrelevent to Southwestern Advantage and has no place on the Wikipedia page describing the company. Southwestern does not, and never has, used traveling sales crews. Thus, the article used as the source for these statements are incorrect. I request that those sentences and it's sources be removed

In addition to this, your previous statement back in May, "MLM affiliates are not meaningfully considered small business owners." is an example of an opinion and not a fact. It is my understanding that information about a company must be based on facts and not opinion. [1]

There are other discrepancies and inaccuracies as well, but before I take the time to list everything that I see as incorrect, outdated, or biased, I'd like to make sure I get a proper response back so as to not waste my time (rryandavis didn't get a response to his/her second post). I also have some additions that I believe should be made in order to help explain more about the company and it's history. Appreciate it!

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view&gettingStartedReturn=true' Djohnston-10 (talk) 01:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia isn't a platform for promotion. Describing sourced information as "irrelevant" is merely your subjective opinion, but we are not interested in that. Further, as someone with a conflict of interest, you are not a neutral judge of such things. If you would like to propose specific, actionable changes, do so, but please keep it brief and support all changes with reliable sources, not firsthand knowledge or personal opinion. Grayfell (talk) 02:01, 30 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Understood. I just want to make sure that Southwestern has a page that is in alignment with a Neutral Point of View. I am unsure how to propose changes with sources if some of the sources that are already being used have nothing to do with the statements (or don't have a source). I'm interested in facts as well.

"The company has notably garnered significant criticism for its poor working conditions and exploitation of students, and it has been banned from many campuses in the United States and United Kingdom." There's no source for this statement. There are sources for the campuses Southwestern has been banned at (further down the page), but not for the first half of the statement. Can it be removed or a source be found for it? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djohnston-10 (talk • contribs) 19:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC) Djohnston-10 (talk) 19:30, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

I'd also like to propose an addition to the Southwestern Advantage Wikipedia article, mostly having to do with history and background.

"Southwestern Advantage, formerly known as Southwestern Company is an American privately held company based in Nashville, TN. Established in 1855, it is the nation's oldest direct selling company. It is a multi-level marketing company that recruits and trains college and university students as independent contractors to sell educational books, software, and website subscriptions door-to-door using direct selling methods. Southwestern works with over 2,000 students at over 300 campuses worldwide." Djohnston-10 (talk) 19:31, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Still waiting for a response, please! Thanks Djohnston-10 (talk) 08:23, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Propsing updated current information
Much of the information on this page is quite outdated and is lacking context. As a simple starting place, under Program (paragraph 3), Southwestern Advantage did away with $500 Letters of Credit years ago. The paragraph could more-accurately read, "Students provide the company a Parent Support Letter, in which the endorsers state their support of the student's participation in the program. This parental endorsement allows the company to ship training materials to the student free of charge."

Under Criticism, this opening statement should be removed: "According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits. These companies only hire employees as independent contractors to avoid following the Fair Labor Standards Act's mandates for minimum wage or overtime pay.[10]" This statement should be removed since it unfairly implies that Southwestern Advantage is one of the un-reputable companies and operates as such. This statement also makes an unfounded generalization that Southwestern Advantage only uses independent contractors to avoid mandates and minimum wage requirements, when in fact the very purpose of the program is to be an entrepreneurial endeavor where students learn to operate their own small businesses.

This paragraph would read more fairly and factually if those first two sentences were removed. Using the Better Business Bureau as the credible source supports both of these proposed edits.

These edits would provide more factual information while not reading like an advertisement or an implication. Rryandavis (talk) 01:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


 * No, I don't agree. MLM affiliates are not meaningfully considered small business owners. How would that justify less information? BBB listings are routine WP:PRIMARY sources which are poor for establishing due weight. If this information is outdated, propose actionable updates based on updated sources. Also, please, yet again, if you have a conflict of interest, disclose it. Grayfell (talk) 01:35, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

The suggestion here is to remove information that is not specific to Southwestern Advantage. Polaris makes mention of activity done by "organizations" – a comment that is vague, Southwestern Advantage is not one of these organizations, and the activity described is not a practice of the company. It's a misleading implication that serves no purpose on this page. The Letter of Credit has not been a practice of the company for years, so to have that listed on the page is inaccurate. In terms of me having a conflict of interest, I am employed by the company, which is why I am not making edits but requesting that those who edit the page make accurate up to date information available. Rryandavis (talk) 18:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposing the page edit be made to accurately describe the company as a direct selling company, not an MLM. The current information on the page is conflicting: "The company operates on a structured multi-level marketing platform where student dealers participating in the program are independent contractors, not employees. The money they earn is solely determined by their sales revenue minus their expenses and the cost of goods sold." Those statements describe direct selling, not MLM. There is an MLM option for selected leaders within the company, however they are the minority of total participants. Entry-level participants with the company do not have an MLM option; they buy at wholesale and sell at retail. --Rryandavis (talk) 19:58, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for changes
Hello, I am a paid editor, please find my disclosure here

1. Section, "Program". Request to remove "multi-level-marketing" and replace it with "Direct Selling"
 * Requesting to review proposed changes for the section "Programs"

Reasons Southwestern Advantage is a Direct selling company and not a multi-level marketing based company. Please see reference 1 on the wikipedia page and you will see that the reference describes the company as a direct seller. I am attaching a quote from the reference here for your convenience

"Southwestern Advantage is a direct seller and publisher of educational and reference products including books, CD-ROMs and a subscription-based website." "Direct Selling"

2.Removal of the sentence highlighted in bold.

They do not receive wages or employee benefits,[1] and the program does not offer any guaranteed pay.[2] Because students hired are independent contractors, they are expected to fully finance their living expenses, food, gas, and rent, even when on company trips

Reason This claim is not cited. The references do not indicate that students have to pay on company trips.

3. Remove, "require" from the sentence, "In addition, expenses of the required Sunday meetings with managers paid for by the students themselve"

Reason This claim is not cited. Independent contractors are not required to attend meetings.

4. Removal of the sentence, "Students regularly work 72 or more hours per week, almost twice the upper limit imposed by the Fair Labor Standards Act"

Reasons The fair labor standards act applies to employers/employees, minimum wage, and overtime pay; it does not apply to independent contractors who run their own business and choose their own working hours. Also, this cited source does not exist

4. Replacing the paragraph, "Students provide the company a letter of credit Parent Support Letter signed by two an endorsers, typically the student's parents, in which the endorsers agree to be responsible for up to $500 each if the student fails to pay any money owed to the company at the end of the summer", with, "The company requires no up-front inventory purchasing, and provides all training and initial sales supplies free of charge. Students provide the company with a Parent Support Letter, signed by the student's parents or guardians, in which the endorsers state their awareness and support of the student’s participation"  With, "Students provide the company with a Parent Support Letter, signed by the student's parents or guardians, in which the endorsers state their awareness and support of the student’s participation."

Reasons The company ended using letters of credit years ago; and no parents or endorsers have any financial responsibility for a student’s failure to pay money owed at the end of summer. What is on the page right now is a misrepresentation; and the cited source for letter of credit does not work either.

5. Removal of the paragraph, "According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits. As independent contractors, Southwestern Advantage avoids the Fair Labor Standards Act's mandates for minimum wage or overtime pay"

Reason

The citation is not relevant to the company - it is a general article that explains facets of the industry as a whole and does not mention Southwestern Advantage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saad Ahmed2983 (talk • contribs) 11:49, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Reply 25-MAR-2019
Kindly reformulate your edit request, taking care to cite verbatim all issues and references. Care should particularly be taken to distinguish instances where: In all instances except number 2, the reference should be listed here on the talk page. Additionally, the COI editor is reminded of the need to sign all posts left on the talk page. Regards, Spintendo  12:08, 25 March 2019 (UTC) Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 15:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * In instances where it is claimed that references are not working, those references have not been provided here on the talk page.
 * "This claim is not cited. The references do not indicate that students have to pay on company trips." This statement says that the claim is incorrectly cited ("The references do not indicate that students have to pay...") and not cited at all "This claim is not cited."). A claim can be either cited (correctly or incorrectly) or not cited — it cannot be both. This, coupled with the problematic references which are mentioned — but not described verbatim — make the edit request not actionable.
 * 1) There is a reference for a claim, but the claim does not state what the reference does
 * 2) There is no reference for a claim
 * 3) The reference for the claim is not working or unreachable


 * Hello, thank you so much for your prompt response and for guiding me. I will reformulate this request as per your instructions (not actionable but neutral) and post it again.
 * Thank you.
 * Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 15:12, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. One of the problems here is that in the numbered outcomes I listed above it can easily be stated that number 2 (there is no reference for a claim) is the theoretical outcome of number 1 (there is a reference for a claim, but the claim does not state what the reference does) because if that reference provided is wrong, then that claim can ultimately be said to be not cited. But for the purposes of this edit request, I think it's best that these two instances be distinctly separated in order to better solve their issues. If you could do that it would be much appreciated. Thank you! Spintendo  19:04, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I will separate these two instances distinctly and will follow your guidelines. Thank you so much Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 12:24, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for Changes
Hello, I am a paid editor, please find my disclosure here

I have reformulated my request as per your instructions.Thanks in advance

1. Request to remove "multi-level-marketing" and replace it with "Direct Selling"

(A) Lead Page: Southwestern Advantage, formerly known as Southwestern Company, is a multi-level marketing company that recruits and trains college and university students as independent contractors to sell educational books, software, and website subscriptions door-to-door using direct selling methods.

(B) Some dealers are invited to return in subsequent years as managers, who recruit their own teams during the school year and earn a percentage commission on the sales of their team, as in multi-level marketing.

Reasons:

(2):There is no reference for the claim that Southwestern Advantage is a Multi-level-marketing company

Personal Findings:

Southwestern Advantage is a Direct selling company and not a multi-level marketing based company. I am attaching a quote from the reference on the main page here for your convenience.

'''"Southwestern Advantage is a direct seller and publisher of educational and reference products including books, CD-ROMs and a subscription-based website." '''

2.Removal of the sentence highlighted in bold.

Because students hired are independent contractors, they are expected to fully finance their living expenses, food, gas, and rent, even when on company trips. In addition, expenses of the required Sunday meetings with managers paid for by the students themselves. Foreign students must pay for their visas and airfare themselves.

Reason:

(1): There is a reference for a claim, but the claim does not state what the reference does

. Personal Findings:

Upon investigating the reference, I found no proof of this claim that "Students are expected to finance themselves on company trips"

3. Remove, "require" from the sentence, "In addition, expenses of the required Sunday meetings with managers paid for by the students themselve"

In addition, expenses of the required Sunday meetings with managers paid for by the students themselves. Foreign students must pay for their visas and airfare themselves.

Reason:

(1): There is a reference for a claim, but the claim does not state what the reference does

Personal Findings:

The reference does not represent the claim that there is a "requirement" for students to attend and pay for Sunday Meetings.

4. Removal of the sentence, "Students regularly work 72 or more hours per week, almost twice the upper limit imposed by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Reason:

(3): The reference for the claim is not working or unreachable

Personal Findings:

The fair labor standards act applies to employers/employees, minimum wage, and overtime pay; it does not apply to independent contractors who run their own business and choose their own working hours.

4. Replacing the paragraph, "Students provide the company a letter of credit signed by two endorsers, typically the student's parents, in which the endorsers agree to be responsible for up to $500 each if the student fails to pay any money owed to the company at the end of the summer., WITH , "The company requires no up-front inventory purchasing, and provides all training and initial sales supplies free of charge. Students provide the company with a Parent Support Letter, signed by the student's parents or guardians, in which the endorsers state their awareness and support of the student’s participation.

Reasons:

This seems to be a case where the reference is questionable as per WP:references, it is a copy of the letter of credit used by the company years ago and has some commentary below ,

Personal Findings:

This claim seems to be incorrect in respect to the references.The company ended using letters of credit years ago; and no parents or endorsers have any financial responsibility for a student’s failure to pay money owed at the end of summer. .

5. Removal of the paragraph, "According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits. As independent contractors, Southwestern Advantage avoids the Fair Labor Standards Act's mandates for minimum wage or overtime pay.

Reason:

(2):There is no reference for the claim

it is a general article that explains facets of the industry as a whole and does not mention Southwestern Advantage.

6. Working "Expectations and iIcome" instead of "Working Conditions and Income:

Working Conditions imply that SouthWestern Advantage Contractors work in a facility, which is not true. The word "expectations" would be more clear since the workers are independent contractors.

7. Removal of the words highlighted in bold from the sentence, "Students typically have a host family near their sales area, generally alumni, family of other interns, or families found by door-to-door appeals. Housing is not guaranteed by the company.

Replacing it with, "Students typically have a host family near their sales area, generally alumni, family of other participants, previous host families, or families found by door-to-door appeals. The company assists participants in securing housing through a Host Family Coordinator, but ultimately the responsibility for securing and maintaining housing is on the participants..

Reason:


 * 1) The first word, "interns" is incorrect, the reference does not mention "interns"
 * 2) . "Housing is not guaranteed by the company", this claim is partially true as it does not shed light on how the company assists its participants in finding housing through a host family coordinator.

8. Removing the paragraph, "Dealers report working 72 or more hours per week in the field, making 30 or more presentations each day, in addition to time spent on bookkeeping, talking to managers or at sales meetings held each Sunday. According to the company, in 2010 the average first-year dealer who stayed with the program for over 20 days grossed $2,415 per month before expenses, which usually range from $1,500 to $3,000.

Reasons:

There are 2 issues with this paragraph"


 * 1) It can be said that  these claims are not cited.
 * 2) The reference for this claim does not work, "According to the company, in 2010 the average first-year dealer who stayed with the program for over 20 days grossed $2,415 per month before expenses,

9. Request to review an addition (update) in the "Working Condition" section:

The company trains that a successful selling season involves 12 or more working hours per day during the summer, Monday through Saturday, contacting 30 or more families each day. The hours worked apply to time actually spent in the field and do not include time spent on record keeping, coaching calls, or at sales meetings. Total expenses for the summer vary by the individual, but commonly range from $1,500 to $3,000. As independent contractors, expenses are generally tax-deductible. There are no sales quotas. All participants are able to earn residual income through the sales of the subscription apps and websites. The average total income of five-time US participants in the program was $137,522 in 2018.

10. Replace the sentence, "Students are taught to indirectly ask if there are other families in the neighborhood who may have small children. " with, "Salespeople prospect for clients using a combination of door-to-door cold calling and client referrals.

Reason:


 * 1) This claim is taken from here, "He explained it is standard procedure for salesmen to ask customers for leads on other families in the neighborhood who may have small children. This is done to save time so salesmen can skip visiting the homes of people who would not be interested in the product.".  Therefore, "taught to indirectly ask" sounds sneaky and perhaps, it is a misrepresentation because it is a Sales procedure for prospect clients.

11. Removing the sentence, "Such questions have sometimes been regarded as suspicious, resulting in complaints to local police, close police scrutiny and even an arrest for disorderly conduct. "

Reason:


 * 1) There is a reference for a claim, but the claim does not state what the reference does

12. Expanding the the sentence to reflect the citation, "Students are encouraged to leave their cellphones at home to focus on the task at hand, but it is not required. "

Reason:

This claim is taken from here, "Mobile phone's that are not registered in the country a student is selling in can be highly expensive to use and also distracting throughout the daytime. The communication system in either country is excellent, students all have host families and inexpensive calling cards can be recommended by managers eliminating the need for mobile phone and the risk of a high bill at the end of the summer."

Perhaps we can say, "Students are encouraged not use their cell phones during day time because they are expensive and distracting. 

13. Replacing the words highlighted in bold: "At the end of the summer, products are shipped to the dealers, who revisit the homes where they made a sale to deliver the product and collect any balance due. Dealers generally pay their living expenses out of the down payments they collect, remitting the rest to the company to cover wholesale costs. Dealers return to headquarters in Nashville, where they settle accounts and receive a check for the season's earnings.

Reason:


 * 1) "dealers" seems like a mistake, the products are shipped to US Participants, dealers are only part of that.
 * 2) "Earnings", the correct term here would be, "Savings"

14. Removal of the sentence, "Some dealers are invited to return in subsequent years as managers, who recruit their own teams during the school year and earn a percentage commission on the sales of their team, as in multi-level marketing.",

Reason:

This claim is not cited

1 5. Addition (update) for the "Working conditions and income" section

All participants who complete one or more years are provided with a professional career counselor for their career path and resume at no charge.

Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 13:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

I spoke too soon here. Looking at the request, more questions are raised than answers. The numbering system is not coherent. The numbering goes as follows: 1. A. B. 2. 2. 1. 3. 1. 4. 3. 4. 5. 2. 6. 7. 1. 2. 8. 1. 2. 9. 10. 1. 11. 12. 13. 1. 2. 14. 15.

The claims need to be individually numbered in order to keep track of them, and the numbers need to be sequential. Please note that relying on indentation to assist in delineating individual requests may be complicated by whichever browser the reviewer is using, which may obscure the indentations. Also, request "2" (the second 2) states to remove the sentence highlighted in bold. This sentnece was the one asked for in request "A" (the first one). Please clarify further. Please note, when asking for a sentence to be rewritten (even if for only one word) once that sentence is rewritten showing the new word, subsequent requests should not ask to have anything else deleted from the same sentence. This prevents the natural "moving along" when one sentence is taken care of, because subsequent request begin asking for more changes to the same sentence that had just been re-written. Each sentence should have one bite at the apple, then the reviewer can move on. Circling one sentence and making sequential changes to different words in the sentence is ultimately inefficient. Regards, Spintendo  23:51, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hello, thank you so much for your expert feedback. My sincerest apologies for the numbering, I completely overlooked it - I will make the numbers sequential and reformulate the request as per your instructions. Regards Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 01:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

Requesting to review proposed changes
Hello, I am a paid editor, please find my disclosure here.

Thank you so much for your expert opinion and solutions. I have made a proposal as instructed and found a few deadlinks in the last section, i have added a follow up from the last coi request and a proposal for the lead page section.

1. Request to remove the sentence, "The Guild of Students at the University of Birmingham passed a motion in May 2006 banning the company from its premises and encouraging the University to do the same. "

Reason:

The reference for the claim is not working or unreachable

2. Request to remove the sentence, " In 2010, the University of Idaho announced that Southwestern Advantage is prohibited from recruiting on campus due to misconduct and violation of University and Career Center policies. "

Reason:

The reference for the claim is not working or unreachable

3. Request to slightly rewrite the sentence, "The company has notably garnered significant criticism for its poor working conditions and exploitation of students, and it has been banned from many campuses in the United States and United Kingdom." and replace it with, " The company has garnered criticism for its intensive challenges ​,​ and it has been banned from some ​campuses in the United States and United Kingdom. It is part of the Southwestern family of companies.​"

Reasons:

The claims regarding the words, "notably", "significant criticism", "Poor working conditions" and "exploitation of students" are not supported with a citation and deviates from the paragraph that it summarizes.

I see many problems with the current sentence in terms of neutrality, a dispassionate encyclopedic tone and its verifiability. I thought that a good solution would be to remove subjective and opinionated adjectives that are not cited, and let it read as more of a neutral statement. I am going to attempt to explain below, which words I have removed and which ones I have replaced.

(A). (Removed)Notably, significant criticism: Notably garnered significant criticism implies that the company received press and media coverage - which it did not.

(B). (Replaced)Poor working conditions​​​ (replaced with, "Intensive challenges", because program the has more intensive challenges than any other summer work program for college students.: The claim "poor working conditions" is not cited

(C).(Removed) exploitation of students: This claim is not cited

(D). (Replaced) Many :replaced with "some", the article makes mention of six campuses since 1977. Why and how is six considered to be “many” over a 42 year timeframe?


 * I mean, I rather protest the idea that I'm a "single purpose account"; I've been put in the position of so frequently re-adding that line simply because "single purpose accounts" have been repeatedly popping up to remove it without reason (not because WP:TDLI). This is the first attempt anyone has made to actually discuss the statement in question, which I appreciate. I don't think this new "general concerns over the direct selling industry" description accurately summarises the critiques of Southwestern Advantage, which (as seen in Southwestern Advantage) has been specifically banned from several campuses that still allow other forms of direct selling.


 * You're quite right that I didn't provide a reference for my language; most of my wiki editing isn't on Wikipedia, so I wasn't aware of the need for sources for individual words. While I cede that "notable" and "significant" may be a bit strong in combination, this link (archived by Archive.org) is a solid source for my use of the word "significant" (full quote: "DSU believes that the concerns raised about student welfare are of significant importance"). Note that the page, and the concerns it contains, is about Southwestern Advantage specifically, not direct selling as a whole. NateBumber (talk) 14:28, 4 April 2019 (UTC)

4. Request to review updated sentence for the "Working conditions and income" section(last coi request point 16),

You mentioned in the last coi request, "In the claim "are provided with a professional career counselor for their career path" is is not clear what is meant by the word for. It seems that whatever actions performed by the counselor on behalf of the student have been subsumed under the word "for" without any clarification on what they are exactly doing for the student's career path."

I agree, perhaps this would be a better alternative?

"All participants who complete one or more years are provided with a professional career counselor to assist with their résumé, job searching techniques, interviewing, and salary negotiation at no charge "

5. Request to review update from last coi request point 10 You mentioned in your feedback, "It is unclear what is meant by five time US participants."

Five-time US participant means Five-year participant

Would this be ok?

The company trains that a successful selling season involves 12 or more working hours per day during the summer, Monday through Saturday, contacting 30 or more families each day. The hours worked apply to time actually spent in the field and do not include time spent on record keeping, coaching calls, or at sales meetings. Total expenses for the summer vary by the individual, but commonly range from $1,500 to $3,000. As independent contractors, expenses are generally tax-deductible. There are no sales quotas. All participants are able to earn residual income through the sales of the subscription apps and websites. The average total income of Five-year participants in the program was $137,522 in 2018.

Kind regards, Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 22:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC) Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 22:20, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Proposed changes
Hello, I am a paid editor, please find my disclosure here

Thank you so much for your response, please find below, the clarifications as requested:

 1. Request to review clarification "update/addition" for the section, "  Lobbying".

1a. Representatives of Southwestern Advantage testified in support of Michigan House Bill 5726 – an act to prohibit a person from promoting or participating in a pyramid promotion scheme.

Clarification requested Please provide the text of the testimony. Furthermore, the claim that this prohibits a person from promoting or participating in a pyramid promotion scheme does not clarify what the bill defines as this type of practice. "Pyramid promotional scheme" would be defined by the bill as any plan or operation in which an individual gives consideration for the opportunity to receive compensation that is derived primary [sic] from recruiting other individuals into the plan or operation rather than from the sale or consumption of products and services by ultimate users. The latter operations may still be considered differently in states where this bill does not go into effect. Mentioning it as a "prohibiting pyramid schemes" bill does not clarify this difference.

Clarification:

Here is the text copied from the citation:

"To the Speaker of the House of Representatives: Sir—I have this day approved and signed Enrolled House Bill No. 5726 (Public Act No. 186, I.E.), being An act to prohibit pyramid promotional schemes; to provide for the powers and duties of certain state and local governmental officers and entities; and to prescribe penalties and provide remedies. (Filed with the Secretary of State June 13, 2018, at 9:42 a.m.)"

Additional Comments:

Defined by the bill as any plan or operation in which an individual gives consideration for the opportunity to receive compensation that is derived primary [ sic] from recruiting other individuals into the plan or operation rather than from the sale or consumption of products and services by ultimate users.

'''1b. The bill was approved by the governor and filed with Secretary of State on August 15, 2018.'''

Clarification requested:

A page number was not provided.

Clarification:

Please find the text at page 1910

 2. Request to review proposed section named "Awards" 


 * Better Business Bureau Torch Award for Ethical Commerce 2015
 * BBB Torch Awards recognize ethical business practices and marketplace trust.

 3. Request to review the the sentence is it is relevant to the subject, ""According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits" 

Reason: The cited article is about the Travelling Sales Industry and not related with Southwestern Advantage.

Clarification requested: A travelling sales industry would conceivably include one where individuals are chosen to sell magazines and other products door-to-door throughout the United States. This outwardly appears to describe a business similar to the one the subject organization conducts.

Clarification:

Southwestern Advantage is neither in the traveling sales crew industry or uses traveling sales crews. By its own name, traveling sales crews are both nomadic and sell in crews.Southwestern advantage participants take up residence in their sales localities, meaning they are not traveling when they are selling – they are living in the communities where they are working and pay local taxes the same as other local business people do. A person relocating for an outside sales job does not make that individual a traveling salesperson, nor does going door-to-door or business-to-business in the community where you have relocated to live. Participants also sell independently, not as crews – as is stated under the lobbying section of the page: "The bill was passed, but in a form that applies only to sales workers who travel in groups of two or more.

The bill did not apply to Southwestern Advantage. The Polaris article writes of the traveling sales crew industry, which Southwestern Advantage is not involved in.

Thank you so much again,

Kind Regards, Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 13:28, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Reply 16-APR-2019
Regards, Spintendo  13:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) ❌ By "text of testimony" I was referring to the testimony provided by the subject company.
 * 2) ❌ "The bill was approved by the governor and filed with Secretary of State on August 15, 2018." Thank you for providing the page number. Unfortunately, the phrase still cannot be approved because it relies on the sentence which would have been placed before it to explain what bill the governor had signed. As that sentence was, and continues to be, declined, the needed context would not be provided, and the sentence about the governor singing a bill on its own — without mentioning what the bill was — would not make much sense.
 * 3) ❌ The awards are not WikiLinked.
 * 4) ❌ The "travel" in travelling sales industry refers not just to the travel made between communities, but also to the travel made between customers (i.e., the travel from door-to-door).

Proposed edits
Hello, I am a paid editor, please find my disclosure here

Thank you so much for your response, please find below, 2 requests.

 1. Request to review proposed section named "Awards" (wikilinked) 


 * Better Business Bureau Torch Award for Ethical Commerce 2015
 * BBB Torch Awards recognize ethical business practices and marketplace trust.

 2. Request to review the the sentence, ""According to the anti-human trafficking charity Polaris, organizations often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits" 

I agree with all of your with previous comments about this sentence. However, I have a few points, which I would like to highlight about this sentence. I felt that this subject requires a little more discussion so this is my analysis, i have tried my best to keep it short and simple.

a. Given the context and how the whole "Programs" section reads - the term "anti-human trafficking" implies that Southwestern Advantage is a mentioned 'organization' which could be, or has previously been, complicit in labor trafficking or human trafficking because the article is about southwestern advantage. This might be misleading to the readers since Polaris does not name any organization. This might require a solution - please recommend.

b. Polaris is referring to organisations, but this sentence implies that southwestern advantage practices this. This sentence, "who often send their recruiters to target unemployed young people and college students with promises of high profits". The first problem with this statement is: Southwestern Advantage clearly makes no promises of profitability. The second problem with this sentence is that it coincides with this sentence in the programs section, " The money they earn is solely determined by their sales revenue minus their expenses and the cost of goods sold. They do not receive wages or employee benefits, and the program does not offer any guaranteed pay .". In one place, the there is a claim that Southwestern Advantage do no guarantee pay, but a few sentences below, there is claim that Southwestern Advantage makes promises and send their recruiters to target people while promising them of high profits.

c. Anti-human trafficking is wikilinked, and is unnecessarily associated with this page, the company has nothing to do with these criminal activities.

Proposed Solutions:


 * 1) Maybe we can highlight the fact that this is a general claim because it seems vague as it is right now and implies negativity. REwriting could solve this.
 * 2) To maintain neutrality and prevent bias, the page should not speak of human-trafficking, labor trafficking, or any other criminal acts that the company is not involved in.

Additional sources showing Southwestern Advantage is not involved in human trafficking or labor trafficking:

Thank you so much again,

Kind Regards,

Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 08:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Reply 17-APR-2019

 * 1) With regards to the awards, you've Wikilinked the organization, but not the individual award. Please provide the Wikilink for the awards given.
 * 2) With regards to your second point, these are important concerns that should be addressed. The best way forward would be for you to make your concerns known at WP:COIN. That noticeboard provides for a much wider pool of experienced editors, from whom, information on how to proceed may be drawn.
 * Regards, Spintendo  11:38, 17 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Hello, thank you again for your response. I cannot find wikilinks for these specific awards, is there something I can do about it? or is it a mandatory requirement to have awards wikilinked?
 * Thanks,
 * Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 12:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)


 * I forgot to ask, can I use external links?
 * Saad Ahmed2983 (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * A WikiLink for the award would be best. That would show that the award has an established notability, and would be the most uncontroversial that could be added. If the awards are from institutions who are well-known for giving out their awards, but there is no Wikipedia page on the award, that would be a bit more controversial, but still within bounds (along with sources from the award institution along with coverage of the award being given by a reputable source). The further you get from an award or institution having Wikipedia pages, the more controversial it becomes when mentioning it, and the more multiple sourcing you need to have it included in the article. Regards, Spintendo  08:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)