User:Shyranoe/Conflict of interest material

(This is an old suggestion for COI guideline. You are welcome to edit it.)

A Wikipedia conflict of interest material is content which is not compatible with the purpose of Wikipedia to produce a neutral encyclopedia. These include material which is clearly promoting persons, causes, organizations, companies, or products, as well as suppressing negative information, and criticizing competitors. This kind of material should not be added in Wikipedia articles.

If the aims of an individual editor and the purpose of Wikipedia conflict, there exists a conflict of interest. It may sometimes lead an editor to add conflict of interest material. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, editing with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged. Of special concern are organizational conflicts of interest. Failure to follow policies and guidelines may put the editor at serious risk of embarrassing himself or his client.

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", but if you have a conflict of interest, you should exercise great caution, avoid these situations or avoid putting in any conflict of interest material when:
 * 1) editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam),
 * and you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, attribution, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for abusing Wikipedia may be blocked indefinitely, as explained in Blocking policy. Blatant promotive edits qualify as abuse.

Do not add conflict of interest material in Wikipedia articles
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and should contain only material that complies with its content policies. Wikipedia is not a forum for advertising, nor a vanity press. We earn the trust of our peers, and the public, by placing the interests of the encyclopedia first.

Avoid adding material that appears to promote the interests or visibility of someone, his/her family members, employer, or associates. Don't make contributions which show lack of connection to what the general reader might want to consult as a reference. Conflict of interest is not in itself a reason to delete an article, but lack of notability is. If you do write an article on a little-known subject, or one in which you are personally involved, be sure to write in a neutral tone and cite reliable, published sources.

Financial case
If you fit either of these descriptions:


 * 1) you are receiving monetary or other benefits or considerations to edit Wikipedia as a representative of an organization (whether directly as an employee or contractor of that organization, or indirectly as an employee or contractor of a firm hired by that organization for public relations purposes); or,
 * 2) you expect to derive monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia; for example, by being the owner, officer or other stakeholder of a company or other organisation about which you are writing;

then we very strongly encourage to avoid editing Wikipedia in those areas. Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest do significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement. If your financially-motivated edits are non-neutral, do not post them.

Legal antagonists case
If you are involved in a court case, or close to one of the litigants, you may find it very hard to demonstrate that what you wrote about a party or a law firm associated with the case, or a related area of law, was entirely objective. It is not impossible to demonstrate this -- the difficulty can indeed be surmounted, and if one does not have any intention to be non-neutral, all the better. However, even a minor slip up in neutrality in a court-case article on Wikipedia for an active case-in-progress could potentially be noticed by the courts and/or their parties, and this could potentially cause real-world harm, not just harm to Wikipedia. Because of this, we extremely discourage editing in this situation.

Self-promotive articles
Avoid any forms of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.

Examples of these types of material include:
 * 1) Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links).
 * 2) Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.
 * 3) Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.

Autobiography
It is not recommended to write an article about yourself. If you are notable, someone else will notice you and write the article. In some cases, Wikipedia users write articles about themselves when the more appropriate action would be to create a user page. In these cases, the article is normally moved into the user namespace rather than deleted. If you believe you may be notable enough, make your case on the appropriate talk pages, and seek consensus first, both with the notability and any proposed autobiography.

Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy allows subjects of articles to correct inaccuracies, and to remove inaccurate or unsourced material.

Close relationships
Friedrich Engels would have had difficulty editing the Karl Marx article, because he was a close friend, follower and collaborator of Marx. Any situation where strong relationships can develop may trigger a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest can be personal, religious, political, academic, financial, and legal. It is not determined by area, but is created by relationships that involve a high level of personal commitment to, involvement with, or dependence upon, a person, subject, idea, tradition, or organization.

Closeness to a subject does not mean you're incapable of being neutral, but it may incline you towards some bias. Be careful and guided by the advice of other editors. If editors on a talk page suggest in good faith that you may have been inserting conflict of interest material, try to identify and minimize your biases, or consider withdrawing from editing the article. As a rule of thumb, the more involvement you have with a topic in real life, the more careful you should be with our core content policies &mdash; Neutral point of view and Attribution &mdash; when editing in that area. The definition of "too close" in this context is governed by common sense. An article about a little-known band should preferably not be written by a band member or the manager. However, an expert on climate change is welcome to contribute to articles on that subject, even if that editor is deeply committed to the subject.

Campaigning
Activities regarded by insiders as simply "getting the word out" may appear promotional or propagandistic to the outside world. If you edit articles while involved with organizations that engage in advocacy in that area, you should pay special attention to not to insert any conflict of interest material..

Citing oneself
You may cite your own publications just as you'd cite anyone else's, but make sure your material is relevant and that you're regarded as a reliable source for the purposes of Wikipedia. Be careful about excessive citation of your own work, to avoid the appearance of self-promotion. When in doubt, discuss on the talk page whether your citation is appropriate, and defer to the community's opinion.

User subspace to publish short autobiographies
Signed-in users may use their user subspace to publish short autobiographies within the bounds of good taste and compatible with the purpose of working on the encyclopedia. If you wish to write about yourself without working on the encyclopedia, consider starting a website or a blog instead. Wikipedia is not a free webhost.

How to handle problems
Suspected conflict of interest material incidents may be reported on the conflict of interest material noticeboard.

Primacy of basic content policies
All text created in the Wikipedia main namespace is subject to rules covering criteria for articles (what Wikipedia is not); encyclopedic quality (verifiability and original research); editorial approach (neutral point of view); as well as the Wikipedia copyright policy. All editors are expected to stick closely to these policies when creating and evaluating material, and to respect the good faith actions of others who edit content to ensure it complies with these policies. Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to.

Notability and saliency
The criterion most often relevant to handling conflict of interest material via policy and guidelines on content is notability. It is also helpful to bear in mind saliency.

There is some basic understanding on the degree of notability required to justify an article. For example, consensus does exist regarding particular kinds of articles, (see Template:IncGuide.) Borderline cases are frequently nominated for deletion and discussed on Articles for deletion.

Submitted material often needs to be filtered, especially if it is peripheral to an article rather than salient. Even in the case of people who are demonstrably well-known, their unrealized aspirations, thoughts, and hobbies are seldom included in Wikipedia. Wikipedia's policy on verifiability prohibits the inclusion of material not already published by a reliable source. But even if we could verify Tom Cruise's favorite breakfast cereal, that is something that is typically not included in an encyclopedia.

Citations of "Who's Who" directories should not be used alone as evidence of notability. These registries' criteria for listing are, as a rule, over-inclusive and may be nonexistent; some are vanity publishers and offer listing for a fee. The inclusion of a name in such a publication is therefore not sufficient to guarantee notability.

Deleting non-notable articles
Articles that make no plausible claim of notability are usually found and deleted shortly after creation under the relevant criteria for quick removals. There are two other main routes:


 * Those that offer some claim of notability, however remote, are usually sent to Articles for deletion. Deletion of the article normally ensues. Sometimes it may be moved to the author's user-page.
 * Where article creators are not active editors, it is usually sufficient to remove content via proposed deletion, reserving AfD for the more contentious cases. Users who lightly create articles of obvious minor interest are most likely inexperienced. If there is nothing particularly offensive about the page, please be kind to them. Before nominating such an article for deletion, try politely informing the author. Pointing to this guideline may gain consent to the deletion. In practice these PROD deletions serve well to clear frivolous articles whose authors abandon them.

Importance of civility
During debates in articles' talk pages and at articles for deletion, don't make disparaging comments about the subject of the article/author and the author's motives. These may border on personal attacks, and may discourage the article's creator from making future valuable contributions.

Avoid using the word "vanity" or similar judgmental terms &mdash; this is accusatory and discouraging. It is not helpful, nor reason to delete an article. Assuming good faith, start from the idea that the contributor was genuinely trying to help increase Wikipedia's coverage.

Remember the basic rules: assume good faith and discuss the article, not the editor.

Editors who may have a conflict of interest
This section is aimed at editors who may have a conflict of interest between their aims and Wikipedia purpose. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits with a conflict of interest are strongly discouraged. Significantly biased edit contents are forbidden.

Declaring an interest
Some editors declare an interest in a particular topic area. They do this in various ways. Many Wikipedians show their allegiances and affiliations on their user pages. You may choose to reveal something about yourself in a talk page discussion. Disclaimer: Wikipedia gives no advice about whether or how to use its pages to post personal details. This guideline only raises some pros and cons.

Advantages:
 * By declaring an interest, you pre-empt anyone outing you or questioning your good faith.
 * Most editors will appreciate your honesty.
 * You lay the basis for requesting help from others to post material for you, or to review material you wish to post yourself.

Disadvantages:
 * Your declaration may be invoked against you at some point.
 * Your edits to the area in question may attract extra attention.
 * Your declaration will give you no special rights as an advocate. Your edits might be followed with special attention, and if you fail to follow content policies, you may be cautioned or, in extreme cases, told to stay away from certain topics.

In the case of commercial editing (editing on behalf of a company):


 * 1) a disclosure enables you to ask openly for help in getting material posted and edited, but
 * 2) once your position is known, you will have to adhere stringently to neutral edits of affected articles, or no edits at all. Note that if you only correct bias against your company and its interests, and not bias in its favour, your editing will be different from that of a regular Wikipedian, who would be expected to do both.

Defending interests
In a few cases, outside interests coincide with Wikipedia’s interests. An important example is that unsupported defamatory material appearing in articles may be removed at once. Anyone may do this, and should do this, and this guideline applies widely to any unsourced or poorly sourced, potentially libelous postings. In this case it is unproblematic to defend the interest of the person or institution involved. An entire article that presents as an attack piece or hostile journalism can be nominated for speedy deletion and will be removed promptly from the site. Those who post here in this fashion will be subject to administrative sanction. Biographies of living persons gives details on how biographical articles on living persons should be written.

On the other hand, the removal of reliably sourced critical material is not permitted. Accounts of public controversies, if backed by reliable sources, form an integral part of Wikipedia's coverage. Slanting the balance of articles as a form of defence of some figure, group, institution, or product is bad for the encyclopedia.

The intermediate territory will naturally contain some grey areas. In many articles, criticism tends to collect in a separate section. There you may find properly referenced reports of well-publicised debates next to vague assertions that "Some people say X, while others think Y." Treat everything on its merits. Ask for reliable sources. Before nuking a whole criticism section or article and distributing its parts over other sections of the article, which may be the best way ahead, consult other editors on the Talk page. Use crisp, informative edit summaries to detail what you have done, an excellent way to establish your reputation as a diligent editor. Raise any less obvious reasoning as a note on the talk page, with any additional links that support your edits.

Suggesting changes to articles
If you wish to suggest changes to an article, use that article's talk page.
 * 1) You may wish to log in and create a user page for yourself that describes you and/or your professional background, using a real name or a pseudonym.
 * 2) Go to the talk page of the article.
 * 3) Create a new section by clicking the "+" at the top of the page. Title it "Proposed change" or "Proposed addition." Type in the changes you wish to have made, and sign your post by typing four tildes, ~.

Conflict of interest material noticeboard
A noticeboard for reporting and discussing incidents that require editors' intervention related to the application of conflict of interest material guidelines is available at:
 * Wikipedia:Conflict of interest material/Noticeboard.