User:Rotideypoc41352/Expired requests/Archives/2013/November

Suburban Express

 * Offeror: User:Suburban Express President
 * Date offered: 03:49, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Request: I apologize if I am misunderstanding any element of this process or of Wikipedia rules in general. If so, please advise. The company I own, Suburban Express, has recently received negative "press", mostly in the form of blog postings criticizing our company for a tangled mess of issues. They can more or less distilled down to: 1) Criticism for pursuing cheaters. Some feel that using lawsuits to pursue debtors is somehow unfair to innocent little college students. But collection agencies want nothing to do with the small debts customers create for themselves. 2) Criticism for the manner in which a particular driver handled a foreign student. 3) Company reaction to false and defamatory information posted on a blog called Reddit.

These three issues have been mashed into one, and a handful of people are really fired up and doing everything they can to maximize damage to the reputation of Suburban Express. "Tech Blogs", which seem to have a vested interest in fanning flames to earn clicks and generate attention, have also worked hard to exploit the situation.

At this time, the Suburban Express article is chock full of inaccurate citations. By that, I mean that the article might say, "Suburban Express likes green eggs and ham" and cite Article A. But examination of Article A reveals that there is no such quote in Article A.

Also, the article lacks balance. Much of the quoted material is negative, and the Suburban Express "side" of the story has been left out. For instance, there are "admissible" quotes which discuss the types of situations which lead to collection suits (ie passengers printing multiple copies of one ticket and thereby stealing rides), but these either do not appear in the article, or they are immediately removed -- leaving one side of the story.

A $150 reward is offered for syncing up the article with the cited articles, by removing statements which are not supported by the cited articles or by removing citations, and defending the article against re-posting of bad citations for 60 days.

A $150 reward is offered for restoring reasonable balance to the article and maintaining same for 60 days.

I want to reiterate that this reward is not being offered to swing this article beyond neutral and into our favor. This reward is being offered to correct numerous factual errors related to cited sources and move the article towards a more neutral state. Thank you.
 * Reward: $150-$300.
 * Limit on rewards: One, to the person who announces their intent to undertake the work. Reward is payable after 60 days of post-completion maintenance have elapsed. I am willing to negotiate this language.
 * Expires: 11/15/13
 * I have accepted this offer and will be editing the Suburban Express article. I have declared my COI on my user page. SirCharlesofDriftwood (talk) 23:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - It seems the individual offering the reward is currently blocked. GamerPro64  01:37, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * I'd rather see an uninvolved admin re-close that because I think this is an inappropriate action (and I do have a potential COI because I have sent emails with someone who claims to represent the company). Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 09:16, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I consider myself uninvolved, as my only connection to this posting or Suburban Express is that this posting is tied to the MfD that I closed. As to me not being an admin, I completely fail to see why that would matter.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
 * It just seems very dubious/controversial to me at the moment. What is the logic for hiding this? Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 04:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * My logic for holding this is that it was viewed as so controvertial that it lead to both the bounty board and the reward board being listed for deletion. At the MfD for this page, this specific posting was focused on by the MfD nominator and some of the commentators. Clearly the community sees it as out of line, so this close was an extension of that MfD.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  20:09, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I disagree. That was just the silly anti-paid editing lobby whining. And I don't see why you say [c]learly the community sees it as out of line. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. ) while signing a reply, thx 12:01, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * We will agree to disagree then. At this point I have defended my position as best as I can, and it is clear that neither of us will be converted to the other's position. If it bothers you enough that you feel it warrants the effort, feel free to ask for a second opinion at WP:AN or some other board you view as appropriate, and alert me to the thread. Otherwise, I'm not sure what else to say.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:43, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Comcast Business

 * Offeror: Cla68 (talk)
 * Date offered: 01:34, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Request: Create an article about Comcast Business, the business-to-business enterprise within the Comcast Corporation. It is a separate entity, accounting for $2.4 billion in sales in 2012.  Current content found at Comcast may be helpful but is very detailed and needs more general encyclopedic coverage.
 * Reward: The Original Barnstar and USD $75, payable direct to editor by check or PayPal, or equivalent donation to a humanitarian charity of winner's choice.
 * For a stub with 3 independent references (e.g., similar to Work N Gear), award is the barnstar.
 * For a start-class article with at least 10 independent references (e.g., similar to Aeroflex), award is the $75 gift.
 * Limit on rewards: One barnstar and one $75 prize will be rewarded to the editor(s) judged to have contributed the most to each goal.
 * Expires: 31 December 2013


 * Comment If the article is created, there is a substantial likelihood that I shall consider listing it at AfD. We normally cover subsidiaries within the main company, even if they are legally separate entities. I suppose I should also say that although this board was kept at MfD, I shall be watching very carefully any request here that offers money. just as I watch other paid editing.   DGG ( talk ) 19:45, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Following up, the article was in fact created, and, as is often the case with paid editing, half of it was advertising: a list of customers. It is not encyclopedic content which businesses use a communication company's services . I removed that part. I'm looking at the rest.  DGG ( talk ) 20:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Rather unfair to say that "half of it was advertising: a list of customers", when clearly it is hardly an unprecedented practice on Wikipedia. DGG, shall we expect your equally faithful work soon on the following articles?
 * notable customers include
 * some of their customers include
 * customer list includes
 * some key clients
 * notable clients
 * some of their clients include
 * client list includes
 * Now, those are several hundred cases of Wikipedia articles presenting nothing different than what the Reward Board author produced. DGG elected to call it advertising and remove it in this one instance.  What about the hundreds of other instances?  Shall we just let those go, or do we have a new WikiProject:Removal of customer lists to launch? - I&#39;m not that crazy (talk) 03:30, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sometimes the individual members of the customer-listings are appropriate, sometimes they are not... the key is whether the specific customer-provider relationship is WP:NOTEWORTHY, rather than mere mutually-WP:ABOUTSELF (let alone *pure* WP:ABOUTSELF which is not good enough). There is a difference between Comcast bragging about how Joe Schmoe is one of their customers (or equivalently about Joe Schmoe bragging on his L33T new weberneteevee connection), and an article in the Wall Street Journal about how Comcast just won a trillion-dollar-contract with the Venusians.  Well, okay, that one would get a dedicated article, probably.  Some local-government-customers are Noteworthy.  Some suppliers are Noteworthy.  Some employees are Noteworthy.  But yes, not every Comcast customer is noteworthy, and WP:SPIP applies.  Hope this helps. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 23:56, 26 November 2013 (UTC)