User

Talk

Gallery

Contribs

Email

I have a conflict of interest for this article on Wikipedia and have been hired to request edits so that it meets all rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. The history shows you as the highest ranking person who edited the article. I was told by client that previous editors have attempted but did not disclose an affiliation so I am wondering if you can confirm that I did the proper disclosure. I made it to my userpage per the rules in PAYDISCLOSE. I am wondering if the article itself can be removed from Wikipedia and put into my sandbox space so that I can make improvements necessary for the Wikipedia community to review. GrantFortyNine (talk) 23:56, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am surprised that someone without prior Wikidpedia-editing experience was hired. Yes, the disclosure is correct, so thank you for doing that. No, unfortunately the article cannot be moved into a sandbox, but you can develop a new version in your sandbox at User:GrantFortyNine/Sandbox if you wish to do so, and then you can easily request people to check it through the discussion page at Talk:Joseph Phua. - Bilby (talk) 12:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I played around with Wikipedia when it first launched but that was more than 20 years ago. From what I see, it has developed quite a bit since then so will take me a minute to get acquainted. Also to be fair, I am not technically being paid (per se). I am working on another marketing project for client and when this was mentioned I told him that I would see what I could do to assist. If I read the terms of use correctly, I would still be considered a paid editor since I am being compensated overall. Thank you for the advice on the sandbox. I will start there and see how to move forward. --GrantFortyNine (talk) 03:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Am I allowed to edit Wikipedia outside of the Joseph Phua article? If there is something you recommend to help me get a better feel for editing I would appreciate the advice. --GrantFortyNine (talk) 03:56, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have requested the replacement of the current article with the one I edited in my sandbox. I think I did it correctly. Hopefully. Feedback is appreciated. --GrantFortyNine (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2024).

Administrator changes

• Red-tailed hawk
• Robertsky

• Ameliorate!
• Ancheta Wis
• Anthony Bradbury (deceased)
• Cobi
• Ev
• Moondyne
• Worm That Turned

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

CheckUser changes

Wugapodes

Interface administrator changes

• Enterprisey
• Izno

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC about increasing the inactivity requirement for Interface administrators is open for feedback.

Technical news

• Pages that use the JSON contentmodel will now use tabs instead of spaces for auto-indentation. This will significantly reduce the page size. (T326065)

Arbitration

• Following a motion, the Arbitration Committee adopted a new enforcement restriction on January 4, 2024, wherein the Committee may apply the 'Reliable source consensus-required restriction' to specified topic areas.
• Community feedback is requested for a draft to replace the "Information for administrators processing requests" section at WP:AE.

Miscellaneous

• Voting in the 2024 Steward elections will begin on 06 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC) and end on 27 February 2024, 14:00 (UTC). The confirmation process of current stewards is being held in parallel. You can automatically check your eligibility to vote.
• A vote to ratify the charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) is open till 2 February 2024, 23:59:59 (UTC) via Secure Poll. All eligible voters within the Wikimedia community have the opportunity to either support or oppose the adoption of the U4C Charter and share their reasons. The details of the voting process and voter eligibility can be found here.
• Community Tech has made some preliminary decisions about the future of the Community Wishlist Survey. In summary, they aim to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resource allocation, and communication regarding wishes. Read more
• The Unreferenced articles backlog drive is happening in February 2024 to reduce the backlog of articles tagged with ((Unreferenced)). You can help reduce the backlog by adding citations to these articles. Sign up to participate!

I am a colleague of James Bailleau and noticed that

had been added to the article.

Noting that there has been no edits since September 2023, I wondered why this has been added four months later.

It detracts from what is otherwise an interesting and well designed article.

What is needed to have it reverted?

CutiePieFYA (talk) 02:00, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The tag is needed because the article was created and edited by multiple undisclosed paid editors and it has not subsequently been independently verified. The tag highlights the issue to allow independent editors to know of and address the concerns. - Bilby (talk) 02:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for your quick response. How is the article independently verified? Is this something as an independent editor that I could help with? I'm am quite willing to spend the time to assist James to resolve this issue.

Do I attempt to find these undisclosed paid editors? Is there a tool that can help me?

CutiePieFYA (talk) 02:19, 2 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please respond to my message of 13 days ago.

CutiePieFYA (talk) 22:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It needs to be checked by someone who is not connected to the article. It has been flagged to allow editors to know that there is a concern, and at some point an independent editor will check the article and remove the tag if apparopriate. - Bilby (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Bilby, regarding your revert on my source addition. Can we come to a compromise? I believe the source I included added context to the original source for that sentence. The original only cited the Australian Skeptics as the source for the claim that Coulthart believed that governments around the world including the Vatican had suppressed information regarding UAPs. My source confirms that he believes that certain governments are suppressing UAP knowledge and, in my interpretation, he appears to support the claim that the Vatican was involved too. At the very least he didn't push back on his interviewee and carefully reiterated the interviewee's claim regarding the Vatican later on. True, it doesn't support anything regarding the bent spoon but it does help add context to the second half of the sentence. What do you think, is there room for compromise here? OneUpOnUs (talk) 14:39, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source failed validation. It needed to a) mention the bent spoon award, b) include the quote, or c) show that he actually belives that the Vatican is supressing claims about UFOs, rather than simply interviewing someone and saying "if they are correct". We need to be very clear with BLPs to avoid harming the subjects. - Bilby (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Understood, thanks for your time OneUpOnUs (talk) 02:14, 17 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Bilby, They're back at it again, removing sourced material from the article with no explanation and no prior discussion. See Special:Diff/1208676162.

Regards, TarnishedPath^talk 13:13, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Saw that. I think a block is warranted - thanks for letting me know! - Bilby (talk) 13:14, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bugger me you were fast. Your block notice showed up at the same instant I left them a message. TarnishedPath^talk 13:17, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I saw the edits and was considering what to do. Your comments made it easier. I hate using WP:NOTHERE, as I think that is the most misused block rationale. But in this case I think it very much applies. - Bilby (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it was pretty clear they were an SPA, and the project needs those like I need a hole in the head (not at all). TarnishedPath^talk 13:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I completely agree. :) - Bilby (talk) 13:21, 18 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]