User talk:ToBeFree

Please click here to add a new message!

^{To add this button to your own talk page, you can use {{User new message large}}. It can easily be modified: Colorful examples are provided on the "Template:User new message large" page.}

Please note that you are currently not logged in.

This is not a general problem – you can leave a message anyway, but your IP address might change during the discussion, and I might end up talking to a wall. Creating an account does not require an e-mail address; all you need is a password and a name. You are not required to do this, but please consider creating an account before starting long-term interactions with other users. Thank you very much in advance.

I've read WP:FCOI closely, (probably)

Context: [1]. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I see the point you have made, but I'm struggling to find the distinction between Foo who owns Bar Plumbing and Foe who works as an employee of Bar Plumbing should each write about Bar Plumbing. Each derives a benefit from writing about Bar Plumbing, one as Owner's profit and the other as wages because Bar hav=s become better now.

I failed to find words on that section which distinguish between the two. It's perfectly possible that I read it with my interpretation of it in mind so glossed over it. Would you mind taking a detailed look and helping me to find what I am missing, please? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Timtrent, the strict disclosure requirement from WP:PAID / TOU §4 is about contributions for which someone receives, or expects to receive, an exchange of money, goods, or services. This is not the case when someone promotes themselves or their completely self-owned business or website. They do have a financial conflict of interest if the promotion could lead to an increase in sales, and we do strongly encourage the disclosure of any COI, but the disclose-or-be-blocked language from the {{uw-paid}} series doesn't apply to self-promotion. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

I may be being obtuse. To be fair I am also awake (for no good reason, but rather frustratingly) at 4am my time, so perhaps that can be forgiven. I've read the elements you have linked to, yet find it hard to see where a distinction is made between a business owner (who may or may not be employed by the business) and an employee, who is paid for their day to day work by the business. I'm not having a discussion for the sake of it, if you get my drift. I've had problems with the semantics here for some time, and you've been kind enough to engage with me over the topic..

I appreciate the discussion we're having, and would like to see chapter and verse of why I should change my opinion so that I can change it. I might be word blind, of course, since I have a current opinion! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 04:06, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Timtrent, it's all good, but I think I've provided all points I could. We probably remain with differing opinions about the existence of a meaningful difference between "financial conflict of interest" and "paid editing". It's a topic that led to heated discussions such as at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Greenman#Oppose #1 (courtesy ping Greenman, Serial Number 54129, JayBeeEll, Bilorv, Levivich, Xeno, Lepricavark, Joe Roe). There was Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Conflict_of_interest_management#Final_decision since, but FCOI vs. PAID wasn't really addressed by it as far as I can see. It's also not really ArbCom's role to decide authoritatively about this specific question. I guess a statement from the WMF could at least help us to understand their definition, and we could still decide afterwards to say "FCOI = PAID", making it a community policy even if the WMF is only concerned about a subset of financial conflicts of interest. If there has been such a clarification already and one of the pinged users is aware of it, please share. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 13:57, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, TBF... wow, I was a real asshole back then. Thank God I've mellowed so much!  :) SerialNumber54129 14:08, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

~ ToBeFree (talk) 14:13, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

We should resolve this ambiguity, but it will be a tiresome process. I think the case above is a good example of why it doesn't make sense to worry about the source of the money; it's the the fact that money is involved that's the (potential) problem. – Joe (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi Joe Roe, while I agree with both what you said, isn't this also an example of how unnecessary a disclosure can be? It doesn't seem to make any difference in the context case to me. Disclosed advertising or undisclosed advertising both leads to the same block, and a disclosure wouldn't lead to an unblock. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I can never understand why discussions on technical matters such as this become heated. I have no difficulty with holding a differing opinion from yours in the very civilised discussion we're having. At least we know that we differ, and have differed collegially.

A WMF 'proclamation' would help, but their hands off approach means it is likely not to happen

@Joe Roe I think you are correct. We do need to do this tiresome process. I don't mind which way the verdict goes, just that it happens and is defined. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks TBF for the ping. FCOI vs. PAID was explicitly addressed by arbitrators at the case you mention: see the votes here, in which the arbitrators voted 3-7-1 against a proposal whose logical structure was "NJ edited while an employee; therefore he engaged in paid editing" (with vote rationales that make it clear that they reject this collapse of a supercategory "editing with a FCOI" into its subcategory "engaging in paid editing"). Unlike SN54129, I'm still an asshole. --JBL (talk) 19:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Aah, a finding of fact rather than a principle, and one that didn't make it in the end. That's why I didn't find it yet thought I had seen it in the case. Thanks! Yeah, that 3-7-1 is practically 2024 ArbCom's response to the question, with Moneytrees's support practically being an oppose towards this question. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:RUSUKR

Hello!

I have created a draft about a well-known Ukrainian company that specializes in the development and production of electronic warfare and electronic intelligence equipment.

Can I move the article to the main space? Would it be a violation of the WP:RUSUKR rules? Thank you in advance for your response. Your opinion on this issue is important to me. Alex091981 (talk) 20:42, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Hi Alex091981, you meet the requirements for editing in the RUSUKR topic area, so that's fine; of course the content is (very) closely related to the war and affected by the restriction, but that's okay. Thanks for asking! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

ToBeFree,Thank you for your response and support.--Alex091981 (talk) 17:26, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

AIGOGY

Okay guys, I am wondering to write AIGOGY Methodology page or make it better According my previous definition or other Methodology like pedagogy, Andragogy, cybergogy etc. MAL111 (talk) 01:21, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

None of this, MehdiAlireza, none of these ideas. Please try correcting typography errors in existing articles or something similarly small and neutral to start editing and gaining first experience with the encyclopedia. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:37, 2 December 2024 (UTC)