User:Okteriel/Five figures


 * Is Okteriel the person publicly linked with a five-figure paid editing contract?
 * Short answer: No, I'm not that guy with that five-figure contract, the five figures disappeared down the memory hold anyway.

User:Smallbones asked the $10,000 question first, which requires an equally valuable answer, provided herein, but, firstly, all editors are duty-bound to take my disclosures for what they say they are, in good faith, and to make their own judgments, as to whether my edits are constructive, on their own merits, regardless of any answer. User:Coretheapple also found my first disclosure incomplete. Additional disclosure is not strictly required, and this particular request puts me and my privacy in third-party danger, a risk already accepted, but I'll give it a go, because, you may have noticed, I like sharing at length, and I have time. Please feel free to comment here anywhere, although I reserve the right to refactor. Okteriel (talk) 20:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Disclosure
As an occasional Wikipedian, I have often dreamt of making a difference at Wikipedia.

Early this week, I happened to be searching for WikiDrama information, one of my interests (the job boards are always good for this), and found a very interesting request associated with a five-figure number, same as any of you. And, the subject, the broad derivatives industry, is another of my interests (others appear in my edit history). And, I, naturally, would never compromise Wikipedia policy, same as any of you. And, yes, I believe I am one of the few that can say confidently that five figures would still not cause me to break any Wikipedia policy knowingly, although I would certainly be tempted!, same as any of you. And, I've had previous success giving people free information to help them edit Wikipedia according to policy and get them up to speed improving the encyclopedia when in trouble due to noncompliance (for instance, "this is how you edit the article about your high school"). And, it's true, I'm an eclectic writer, same as any of you, so, in my line of work, I've proposed giving paid consulting before to help people edit Wikipedia, but I was not taken up on that offer.

And, it turned out, I had vacation time scheduled this week from the place I do actually work for (no outing, thanks). (In fact, my family is wondering about my attachment to this latest obsession.) And, I did a little initial analysis of Banc De Binary, the subject article, which looks like a uniquely laughable series of travesties no matter whom you are, I am greatly amused by same; and, I decided, I actually had the time to see about gathering the community around repairing an epic fail and I really could make a difference here: but, if I chose to do that, I would most certainly be accused, and would most certainly be tested, as to whether I really do know enough about Wikipedia to improve it. I do have experience on another language's Wikipedia, and have purposely kept away from en.wikipedia. Since I had emailed BDB as part of my research and got a reply from Mr Oren Laurent directly, I decided to use that as my disclosure and let everyone else make their own determinations.

Honestly, I was just as shocked as anyone when the job board showed that the job had been awarded at the intended level, and I will be more shocked if evidence ever arises that any of it will ever be paid. So I'm still very amused that my choices to begin research in response to the first posting aligned in a perfect storm with the confirmation posting that the job was awarded, leading to me being perceived as this unique guy. But, I do rather like that perception, and the handicap it puts me at is probably better than an alternate handicap I might face for answering the question either "yes" or "no", and the slight attention certainly allows me to enjoy living my dream for a little while.

I began by autoconfirming, and attempting to get three bold discussion drafts posted (and I succeeded, but differently than I expected as per article talk), and announcing my intention to discuss, and I was reverted before completing the task, after only 4 minutes. I call that "being welcomed on the wrong page". I was prepared for that. 3 minutes later the article was full-protected by the black kite, for whom I have profound respect, frozen at the version that I had intended to cease posting at all along anyway. I call that "becoming the sacrificial guinea pig". I hope I wasn't disruptive, but it sure proves the charged atmosphere. I'm also glad my edits have now brought the community to a discussion on this epic fail of an article. (Yah! Protection lifted.)

But what should I say? I am exceedingly amused by the idea of people thinking I'm earning five figures, although my amusement is probably temporary. But, several problems to consider; everything said about five figures is, politely, still the rumormongering phase, so far, and, I have the right to be judged according to the constructiveness of my edits, and according to their diversity, and, all the real-world talk risks exist, of being perceived as an "outer", if one is not careful. But, I would expect, sooner or later, talk rumors would cease, and sane heads would prevail.

So, my first thought, and it's subject to changeability, is that I should stand on my honor, and respectfully wait to decide if I should answer. I don't know that answering either "yes" or "no" would improve Wikipedia any, and holding out does look to me like an improvement in the discussion; so I need to hold. Look, we already have an editor who self-disclosed his BDB job to comply with WP:COI, a job that ordinary analysis suggests would pay him at least five figures from the exact same subject company, and look where it got him! He got two months' sitting on a limbo edit request (marked "no consensus" but never closed), about the unambiguous question of his own company's legal name! Not a soul would help, and one motivated WP:SPA with stated contrary intent was all it took to immobilize analysis of what is the first fact of any Wikipedia article, the topic identity. I would imagine that whatever frustration has been inflicted on Mr Laurent, as reflected by his own statement summarized below, accords with neither Wikipedia policy nor Wikipedia improvement. Someone said he was suffering for hiring Wiki-PR last year; sure, but, onwiki, that's over now, and we're busy improving the article, I thought, and I hope.

I may be able to post the email here later, but there would be a few questions to resolve first. I want to email BDB again to make sure that my sharing the email would not reveal anything they intended to be private. I want to make sure it won't get me in trouble to make such a disclosure, or compromise my own highly valued privacy. I want to make sure I don't out anybody, such as the person who received the job award. And I have no assurance that any of those safeguards will happen, nor any centralized authority who can guarantee them to me.

But, the gist of the conversation is what I wrote on talk. I emailed BDB, Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 14:44 GMT (hope I converted right), saying, "We observed a public offer where someone (maybe you) requested edits to wikipedia.org article(s) that mention your company or staff. We would like to provide you some free information about your profile on Wikipedia, without any risk or obligation whatsoever. ... If you can provide any data about your company/staff and history, such as you send to your own prospective clients or vendors, or if you can comment about your goals on Wikipedia, that would greatly help". He replied at Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 17:49 GMT, by sending a company article, and by saying that he would love Wikipedia to reach a consensus about his situation rather than continue its undying noncompliance.

So, let's politely hold on answering this primary relevant question, until there is consensus about what should be done by everyone else, if a five-figure editor ever does appear. I don't want to break any policies when I meet him or her! How about you? Call me a voluntaryist, but every Wikipedian should always act like someone earning $10,000 for every improvement. And, by the way, I'm all for assisting with this community consensus, but I might have a conflict with that subject (paid editing on Wikipedia) too! I hope I'm not in block danger just for respectfully asking to wait to answer. But, if blocking me would really improve Wikipedia, I'm all for it.

Please don't take my early edits as play, though. Okteriel is deadly serious, about improving Wikipedia, and I am Okteriel. Okteriel (talk) 20:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

More disclosure
Since User:Figureofnine objected to my disclosure as "beat[ing] around the bush", what else can I disclose? Should I claim admit I'm not that guy? Or claim admit I am that guy? Would I get in trouble naming the job board account of the guy just to confirm who we're talking about? Or the first and last characters of it? I don't know. I'm thinking I can post all the emails here, and I was going to do that, but let me look again to see if it makes sense, because I know it's a step of no return. Thanks for your patience. Okteriel (talk) 17:55, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Community comment
I have come. This subject shall be saved. Continue discussion. Okteriel (talk) 20:59, 7 June 2014 (UTC)