User:Blablubbs/UPE Bingo

Are you wondering whether an editor you've just stumbled upon may be editing for pay without disclosing it as would be required by our terms of use? Play the following fun game and find out! The scoring system is simple: Add the indicated number of points to your tally for each item that applies to their edits; if the tally reaches 50 points, the editor in question may be eligible for a free indefinite block, redeemable at the relevant noticeboard.


 * 1) (m) "Updated info" (+10'000) (10 points)
 * 2) Article subjects are referred to as "Mr." or "Mrs." (5 points)
 * 3) Article subjects are referred to as "Doctor" or "Professor" (10 points)
 * 4) Article subjects are referred to by their first name (10 points)
 * 5) "Extensive experience" (10 points)
 * 6) (Tag: COI template removed) (10 points)
 * 7) "™" (15 points)
 * 8) (Tag: References removed) (5 points)
 * 9) (→ Controversy) (Tag: Section blanking) (20 points)
 * 10) 10 bonus points if accompanied by the edit summary "removing slanderous material"
 * 11) "We" (20 points)
 * 12) "Authorized by the marketing department" (50 points)
 * 13) Content obviously copy-pasted from press kit (30 points)
 * 14) 5 Bonus points if combined with no. 10
 * 15) Double bonus points if it's later rewritten for "neutral language"
 * 16) Triple bonus points if the edit gets revdel'd for copyright infringement
 * 17) Quadruple bonus points if it still includes "© 2020 all rights reserved"
 * 18) "Wikipedia profile" (20 points)
 * 19) Inserts list of "company values" (30 points)
 * 20) 10 bonus points if badly formatted
 * 21) Extensive descriptions of article subjects having great affection for – and giving lots of money to – children, disadvantaged groups, cute animals, the environment or any combination thereof (30 points)
 * 22) 10 bonus points if this is paired with the phrase "giving back"
 * 23) 15 bonus points if a philanthropy section is added to a BLP about a person currently experiencing public scrutiny
 * 24) Text is full of WP:EL violations (10 points)
 * 25) 10 bonus points for each link to a webshop
 * 26) 5 bonus points for each link to a social media account
 * 27) "Revolutionary" (10 points)
 * 28) History section in bulleted list format because the spammer could not be bothered to rewrite the bullet points they got from their boss (15 points)
 * 29) Adds perfectly formatted page in one go, despite being a very new account (20 points)
 * 30) "Our page" (15 points)
 * 31) User creates article in mainspace after exactly 10 edits (10 points)
 * 32) 10 bonus points if the article's draft version was previously speedily deleted under criterion G11
 * 33) "Award-winning" (10 points)
 * 34) Testimonials (30 points)
 * 35) Mention of article subject having pulled themselves up by the bootstraps (15 points)
 * 36) 15 bonus points if this includes mention of a garage
 * 37) Exhaustive list of non-notable awards (10 points)
 * 38) "Groundbreaking" (10 points)
 * 39) "The community" (5 points)
 * 40) "You" (10 points)
 * 41) Continues promoting their employer in their unblock request (25 points)
 * 42) "Leading" (10 points)
 * 43) "[Subject] has been named one of the top [number] [thing] in [place] by [completely irrelevant website]" (20 points)
 * 44) "I assure you I am not a paid editor, I am just a big fan of [incredibly boring company]" (20 points)
 * 45) "On the rise" (15 points)
 * 46) Intermission: IRChelp bonus round!
 * 47) "[Other company] has an article as well" (15 points)
 * 48) Bribe offer (50 points)
 * 49) Complaints about not giving an up-and-coming business a chance (20 points)
 * 50) Complaints about draft only being declined because of reviewer's biases against [group] (10 points)
 * 51) Requests to speak to helper's manager (15 points)
 * 52) "I have donated lots of money to Wikipedia in the past" (20 points)
 * 53) Complaints that Wikipedia won't help [company] get up and running despite [company] clearly providing a great service to mankind (25 points)
 * 54) Article about a company is edited by an IP owned by said company (50 points)
 * 55) Username contains any of the following: 'PR', 'Communications', '[article name] fan', '[article name]' (40 points)
 * 56) 5 bonus points if the username ends in [current year]
 * 57) Doesn't seem to understand how to answer the question "Who is 'we'?". (10 points)
 * 58) Image of biography subject that's obviously taken by a professional photographer (15 points)
 * 59) 15 bonus points if the uploader simultaneously insists that the own work claim is valid and that they have no connection to the subject whatsoever
 * 60) 10 bonus points if it was uploaded to commons by a single-purpose account
 * 61) "Trusted" (15 points)
 * 62) "Influencer" (10 points)
 * 63) "Blockchain" (15 points)
 * 64) Article subject doesn't "sell products", but "provide solutions" (15 points)