Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#Christopher Connor

• {{pagelinks|Boaz Levy}}
• {{pagelinks|Matan Yaffe}}
• {{pagelinks|Ksenia Ovsyanick}}
• {{pagelinks|Ran Balicer}}
• {{userlinks|MrEksh}}

User:MrEksh is undisclosed paid exitor in each of his edits, check his Hebrew wiki page

[https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%AA%D7%9E%D7%A9:MrEksh MrEksh]. He disclose there he wrote Boaz Levy un English for payment, but didn't disclose it in here. Many of the articles he created in English. He made full disclosure for the parallel articles he created in Hebrew, all of of his edits are paid. [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%94:%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%99_%D7%9B%D7%94%D7%9F_(%D7%A4%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%98%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%90%D7%99,_1972)#%D7%A2%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9B%D7%94_%D7%91%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%9C%D7%95%D7%9D here he confess for editing the Hebrew for payment] of [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Cohen_(politician,_born_1972), which he simultaneously edited in English]. IN the Hebrew [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%94:%D7%A0%D7%90%D7%95%D7%95%D7%99%D7%98%D7%A1_%D7%A4%D7%98%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%95%D7%9D talk page, he confess for being paid], but conceal this the corresponding english [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Navitas_Petroleum talk page]. HE MADE disclosure [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%97%D7%94:%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%9F_%D7%99%D7%A4%D7%94 in Matan Yaffe hebrew], but not in the corresponding enhlish version Talk:Matan Yaffe.

2A0D:6FC7:604:18C5:73CF:842:AC56:239B (talk) 10:27, 16 May 2025 (UTC),

:They did indeed make those disclosures on he.wiki; I would imagine that they will be willing to similarly comply with WP:PAID here? _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:51, 16 May 2025 (UTC)

::User:Netherzone. 2A0D:6FC7:623:D69E:21A5:8CB7:3D6:198 (talk) 09:15, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Thanks for the ping. I also noticed this while doing NPP, and left a message on the editors talk page re: UPE and WP's guidelines. @MrEksh, you need to read and understand these English Wikipedia guidelines for paid editors and kindly abide by them. If you have been paid to create articles for various individuals or companies, this needs to be properly disclosed, see WP:UPE for information on how to do that. You should make these disclosures for all articles for which you have been paid or have a COI. Moving forward, it is advised that you stop editing these articles directly, and instead use the COI Edit Request System to propose changes to these articles so that other unconnected editors can evaluate the requested changes and either make them on your behalf or not. Info on paid edit requests is here: WP:EDITREQ, and a link to the Edit Request Wizard can be found here: WP:ERW which makes that task easy. Netherzone (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2025 (UTC)

{{userlinks|Brennonhope}} Possible Conflict of Interest. See this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Brennonhope&oldid=1290883388 edit] Pibx (talk) 18:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{Ping|Pibx}} This is not a matter for this noticeboard; there is no ongoing problem with article content and there has not been the required prior discussion with the user concerned. Just tag the user page as spam, and/ or report to WP:AIV as a "promotion-only account". WP:Twinkle will help you do the latter. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:57, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Chad Lupinacci}}
• {{userlinks|68.195.64.95}}

IP 68.195.64.95, which geolocates to the subject's general area, has been adding unsourced promotional content.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{userlinks|Therpaistny25}}

Possible Conflict of Interest. See this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%20talk:Therpaistny25&oldid=1291584784 edit]. Pibx (talk) 04:44, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

: The user has been blocked indefinitely for "advertising or promotion." -- Pemilligan (talk) 19:46, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{Ping|Pibx}} As I advised you above: Please do not use this page to report simple cases of spam. Report that to WP:AIV. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:57, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|David Assia}}
• {{userlinks|Itamar Sade}}

He is undisclosed paid editor. Each one of his edits are paying for. The last one, David Assia, declined twice (and years ago other paid editors failed to create it), last time yesterday and amazingly it is published today. User:S0091, User:Gheus, User:Explicit, Netherzone.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0D:6FC7:703:A0CB:8794:FD1D:A5C:2ED4 (talk) 09:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:I've requested a cleanup of the botched talk page move at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Draft talk page moved to main space and overwritten.

:But where is the prior discussion, as required at the top of this page: {{Tq|1="This page should only be used when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue"}}?

:IP also failed to notify the subject of this discussion, also as required. I have now done so.

:Also, note that IS has a CoI declaration on their user page, albeit malformed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:52, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::he disclose various paid entries in his [https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%AA%D7%9E%D7%A9:Itamar_Sade Hebrew User page] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A0D:6FC7:720:AFAF:5F12:EEA1:C6B0:7C1D (talk) 17:20, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Yes, and I've disclosed here before that i'm a paid writer. Please tell me where I should disclose it and haven't. Thank you. Itamar Sade (talk) 17:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|List of philanthropists}}
• {{userlinks|Vikash Thakkar}}

Editor Vikash Thakkar keeps adding Faruk G Patel to this article with awful sourcing. Thakkar is a clear WP:SPA, hasn't responded to my COI request on his talk page but found time to restore the entry on the article. Previous contributions to articles such as Wind power in India have included the classic edit summary, "As a Leading Wind Energy Company In India, We Have added our Few Wind Sites which are fully commissioned". COI seems crystal clear to me... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:37, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:Thakkar has since responded and denied any COI. Given the SPA and the edit summaries, I am disinclined to AGF here and don't believe him. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:39, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:Please be sure to notify any editor you report here, as required in the notice at the top of this page (I have done so for you in this case). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::Apologies, @Andy, believe it or not I missed that notice. Thanks for filling in. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 06:53, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Enhle Mbali Mlotshwa}}
• {{userlinks|Lihlesdue}}

Lihlesdue tripped the edit filters while I was monitoring the edit filter log, so I reverted their edit due to cited content being removed without an edit summary and as a previous editor had already reverted an identical edit. This continued, with another editor reverting their edits. I then noticed [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Enhle_Mbali_Mlotshwa&diff=prev&oldid=1291539668 this edit] on my watchlist, where the user said {{tq|"I am Enhle's PA and she has asked me to remove outdated private information which is her spouse information. And she asked me to add her children's names so its not just left as 2. She also asked me to add her mother and update her information"}}. Another editor had already added a COI notice on the user's talk page, so I reverted the edit as it was unsourced and added a warning on their talk page. Due to the user's disclosure as the article subject's PA, I then added the {{tl|Connected contributor (paid)}} tag to the article's talk page and the {{tl|Undisclosed paid}} tag to the article. I would like to AGF due to the user's contributions of the names of the article subject's family members, which just need to be sourced. However, I'm not sure about the continued attempts at removing details about the article subject's divorce. Since adding the {{tl|Undisclosed paid}} tag to the article, the user has reflected on their actions, and has requested that the tag be removed {{tq|""If the article is now in line with Wikipedia policies"}}. Another editor has helped to clean up the language of the article, but I'm concerned by the user's comment that {{tq|"[I] would like to confirm that i was not paid to do any edits"}} as this does not seem consistent with their earlier disclosure. Thanks, Referentis (talk) 17:02, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:I would like to sincerely apologise for any confusion caused. I’m still new to editing on Wikipedia and wasn’t aware that stating I wasn’t paid could conflict with my earlier disclosure. That was not my intention at all, and I regret any misunderstanding it may have created.

:Since then, I have undone all of my previous edits and will make sure to follow all Wikipedia guidelines going forward. I appreciate the work the community does to uphold Wikipedia’s standards and I’m committed to contributing in a responsible and transparent way.

:Thank you again for your understanding. Lihlesdue (talk) 17:18, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

::{{ping|Lihlesdue}} ZeroGPT says that your response was 100% generated by an AI tool. Please don't do this, because it makes anything you post look disingenuous. To be clear, you are a paid editor. It does not matter whether or not you are receiving specific payment to edit Wikipedia. Your employment as this individual's PA is, by itself, enough to trigger the paid editing disclosure policy. You need to learn how to use the edit request wizard to request changes that can be reviewed by independent editors.

::{{ping|Referentis}} Good call on the using the {{tl|connected contributor (paid)}} template on the talk page. If all of this editor's changes have been removed, then the {{tl|undisclosed paid}} tag can be removed. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Thank you for all the advise you have given me. I will make sure to put to use. I am sorry for using AI, I did this to articulate my thoughts well as English is not my first language. I will refrain from doing this going foward. Thank you for clarifying the meaning of paid as l thought l should have received payment to fall under that category. Thank you and my apologises Lihlesdue (talk) 16:33, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Sunil Dutt}}
• {{userlinks|Gooshh}}

This s.p.a. is obsessed with accumulating huge and fawning chunks of material about the subject's legacy, tributes to him on his death (from such reliable sources as his own son), etc. I applied TNT to the worst of it, but the whole thing reeks of idolatry and hagiography. They seem determined to maintain this as a memorial to the subject. Orange Mike | Talk 20:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)

:I never thought that my contribution will be hopeless. I am not doing it again. I am not obssessed with anyone. I may not be experienced but atleast i contributed.‬ Gooshh (talk) 09:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::@Orangemike i not going to contribute anything to this page. You know how to improve it. I contributed because the page of this particular person was incomplete before. Kindly remove my name from conflict interests. Gooshh (talk) 12:02, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:{{Ping|Orangemike}} As you know, and as stated at the top of this page, {{Tq|1="This page should only be used when ordinary talk page discussion has been attempted and failed to resolve the issue"}}. Where did such discussion take place? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:Sir I apologise that my work hampered the page since I am new to wikipedia. But I will take care of these things. Please remove my name, I would more careful furthermore. Gooshh (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::@Gooshh, I think that the description at WP:POETIC might be helpful to you. The main problem is stylistic. I suspect that in your culture, when you write about a successful person, there is a lot of description to really draw the reader into the subject, and you are accustomed to writing in a lively, interesting style. The English Wikipedia, by contrast, is written in a very boring, brief, more "northern European" style. That means that instead of writing something like "He also spent the last couple of decades of his life as a tireless campaigner, raising money for the help of poor cancer patients through charities and fundraisers all across the world", we would write "Later in his life, he raised money for cancer patients".

::Sometimes, especially when experienced editors are unfamiliar with the ordinary, normal writing style that's common in much of Africa and Asia, then they worry that the subject of the article is actually paying a new editor to write about how wonderful they are. I'm sure you can imagine what happens to articles about some politicians: their supporters take out everything negative and add fluffy praise, and their opponents do the opposite. We sometimes make wrong guesses about why editors are writing in a rather poetic or gushy way. But usually, if you just tell us what your connection is (whether that's "He's my grandfather, and I'm fixing up the article as a Father's Day gift" or "I've never met him but I've watched his movies" or "I got hired to improve this article" or anything else), then we can try to help you. In return, we would appreciate it if you tried to help us by reducing the poetic content on this and any other article you happen to see it in. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:04, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Excellently put! You might consider expanding that into an essay, that we can all link to, from here and the teahouse/ Help Desk. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:09, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Perhaps under a title like WP:Puffy prose doesn't prove payment? I don't feel like writing that right now, but if you'd like to start something (whether adapting the above or starting over), I'd be happy to read it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:::@WhatamIdoing thank you for your suggestion. Please guide me further. I really want to improve this page. Please don't get me wrong. Gooshh (talk) 18:28, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Pasco eSchool}}
• {{userlinks|Floating Orb}}

I tagged Floating Orb's talk page with a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Floating_Orb&diff=prev&oldid=1291079093 paid editing] notice.

Floating Orb responded that they [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Floating_Orb&diff=next&oldid=1291150088 are a student] at that school (they also created the article).

At Pasco eSchool, I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pasco_eSchool&diff=prev&oldid=1291807524 removed promotional content] this editor added, with the edit summary, "none of these awards are notable, per WP:WPSCH/AG".

Floating Orb reverted the promotional edit twice: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pasco_eSchool&diff=prev&oldid=1291816427], [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pasco_eSchool&diff=prev&oldid=1291828651].

Floating Orb [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Magnolia677&diff=prev&oldid=1291827162 left a message on my talk page], comparing their school article to some other school article.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Magnolia677&diff=prev&oldid=1291870192 I responded]: "I have already pointed to a consensus that discourages the promotional edits you are making to the school you attend, yet you keep edit warring to add this puffery. I have cautioned you about COI editing, but you're not getting it."

Floating Orb [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Magnolia677&diff=next&oldid=1291870192 responded], again comparing his school article to some other school.

Their promotional edits have not been self-reverted.

This editor seems determined to add promotional content about their non-notable teachers and classmates, despite being cautioned about our COI policy and about a consensus at WP:WPSCH/AG to not add promotional content or content about non-notable awards.

Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:04, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:I think that the Angeline Academy page has a student major contributor too. It isn't any different. Floating Orb (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

::The fact that this argument in a different context has the shortcut WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS should tell you all you need to know. Cabayi (talk) 16:41, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Yeah. That makes sense. Thank you. Floating Orb (talk) 17:21, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:You should ask him. Floating Orb (talk) 15:56, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:Anyway I added the criticisms section to balance everything a little. Floating Orb (talk) 15:58, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:Never mind. Removed the section. Floating Orb (talk) 16:07, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

::Yet you continue to add promotional content about the school at which you are a student! Magnolia677 (talk) 21:53, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

:::I didn't. Floating Orb (talk) 23:02, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

:::Maybe slightly. Floating Orb (talk) 23:03, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Manny Cid}}
• {{userlinks|BottleOfChocolateMilk}}
• [https://www.politicalcortadito.com/2024/02/18/manny-cid-wikipedia-page-questioned/ Suddenly, after video ad, Manny Cid’s Wikipedia page is questioned, at risk]

User was alleged as a political operative in the above-linked third-party article, which detailed [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Manny_Cid user's efforts to delete] the Manny Cid Wikipedia page while he was a candidate for the 2024 Miami-Dade County mayoral election. Since user actively curates pages for current political campaigns, I feel their edits and proposals for deletion should be more heavily scrutinized. TheNewMinistry (talk) 19:36, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

• lol. For the record, TheNewMinistry started this discussion because they're upset that I nominated a page they created for deletion BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 22:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)
• :Comment: BottleOfChocolateMilk linked directly to an unrelated AFD page to intentionally encourage vote brigading, which is [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Gainer&diff=prev&oldid=1292558696 already happening]. TheNewMinistry (talk) 16:54, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
• ::{{NAO}} This is an incorrect assumption. Worgisbor (congregate) 19:10, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

:Allegations of a conflict of interest based around a few words from a blog clearly aren't going anywhere. Not that 'curating pages' constitutes a CoI anyway. I suggest that TheNewMinistry reads what Wikipedia:Conflict of interest actually has to say on the subject, and then confines any further comment to situations where there is actual evidence that policy is being violated. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:56, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:For reference, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manny Cid. Seems a clear enough consensus to delete. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:58, 26 May 2025 (UTC)

:The first thing I noticed is that the OP's provided links are from February 2024, which arouses suspicion of why it's being dredged up now. There's plenty to say about BottleOfChocolateMilk's editing behavior: tons of WP:OWN, building content en-masse with non-RS, blatant disregard for the intent of {{Tl|Historical election article}} in building and curating election articles, to include edit warring justified by invoking made-up rules, etc.

:This particular discussion smacks of forum-shopping. There's been a years-long pattern of problematic behavior in articles on current and future U.S. elections. I've witnessed this behavior since 2011. BottleOfChocolateMilk only began actively editing in late 2020, so they're merely the latest iteration of a revolving cast of characters. WT:E&R sees fairly steady discussion, but little or none in this vein. WP:ANI is mostly whiney drama targeting particular finer points at the expense of the big picture, much like how this discussion started. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 04:34, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{NAO}} I'm calling WP:BOOMERANG on this. I know it's not ANI, but they also took an editor here more or less alleging a conspiracy against "progressives" because articles that traditionally are not notable per WP:POLOUTCOMES (like candidates in local primary elections) are nominated for deletion. They have made personal attacks against both BottleOfChocolateMilk and myself and have made comments that, while traditionally may not qualify as competency issues, might qualify given they are taking other editors to Admin noticeboards. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:01, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

::I appreciate {{ping|Star Mississippi}}'s blocking of the AfD and the subject at hand, but I am concerned given that TheNewMinistry [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TheNewMinistry&diff=prev&oldid=1292639249 immediately deleted the block notice off their talk page] (like they have any sort of warning or comment in the past) and then continued to keep editing on other subjects. TheNewMinistry made unfounded personal attacks against against BottleOfChocolateMilk and myself, and doubled down on the personal attacks they don't understand how Wikipedia's basic sorting works (which {{u|Worgisbor}} has also pointed out). I think a mainspace block at the minimum is warranted as at the current moment they have yet to explain personal attacks and accusing bad faith after they legitimately accused a policy based AfD nomination of being part of some conspiracy. If TheNewMinistry going to simply cast off any sort of warning and even a partial block, then a block where they agree to abide by WP:CIVIL is necessary. Best, GPL93 (talk) 19:20, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

:::{{ping|Star Mississippi}} was nice enough to keep that matter separate from this one. Please keep it that way. I apologize if you feel wronged, but I won't be baited into further discussion on a matter of which I am no longer participating, and has no relevance to the COIN discussion at hand. Best, TheNewMinistry (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

::::Given that the page you are concerned about, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manny Cid, and the page you think we should not be concerned about, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Gainer, both can be well explained as "mayoral candidates do not pass WP:NPOL" rather than as motivated by any political bias, and that you have been making a fuss on the Gainer AfD over exactly the claims you are raising here, and have posted a direct link to this discussion on the Gainer AfD, I kind of think that it is in fact highly relevant. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:10, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::TheNewMinistry Well, you did start this COIN so I think this is the best place to continue this conversation-Admins should be able to parse this regardless given that they understand all of Wikipedia's policies and WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL are very basic ones. "I apologize if you feel wronged"-You directly accused me of brigading-then doubled down after I gave my explanation complete with you accusing me of lying with the faultiest logic possible. You started this thread attacking another editor and claiming that his AfD nom was part of some sort of "great conspiracy". I think that only a block from editing will force an agreement to follow WP:CIVIL. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:14, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

::::::Wikipedia:User pages: "Policy does not prohibit users, whether registered or unregistered, from removing comments from their own talk pages, although archiving is preferred. If a user removes material from their talk page, it is normally taken to mean that the user has read and is aware of its contents". Please refamiliarize yourself with the rules. Best, TheNewMinistry (talk) 20:18, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

:::::::I know the rules, Communication is also required to edit on Wikipedia and particularly when it comes to instances such as a block due to editing behavior. Best, GPL93 (talk) 20:29, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|BC Fourteen}}
• {{userlinks|Faktmagik}}

Faktmagik (definitely an WP:SPA) has repeatedly inserted [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BC_Fourteen&diff=1012291972&oldid=977597035 1][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BC_Fourteen&diff=1291684192&oldid=1287550215 2][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BC_Fourteen&diff=1051323855&oldid=101286588 3] detailed, unsourced material into WP:BLP article BC Fourteen to the extent that there is apparently either COI or WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY going on. The editor has been completely non-responsive to greetings, warnings, and even a ping at WP:BLPN. After those notifications, the editor has [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BC_Fourteen&diff=prev&oldid=1292533967 removed the COI and N maintenance templates] [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BC_Fourteen&diff=1292604309&oldid=1292594978 twice], claiming to have "fixed" it. JFHJr (㊟) 21:11, 27 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo}}
• {{userlinks|Cpupdates}}

Cpupdates exclusively edits California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo and their username indicates that they may have a strong connection with the university. However, they have not responded to a direct question on their User Talk page asking if they have a connection to the university. ElKevbo (talk) 00:25, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|John_McIlvogue}}
• {{userlinks|Mcilvogue}}

It's my belief that editor McIlvogue has a close personal or business connection with article topic John McIlvogue. They recently removed a sourced part of the John McIlvogue article regarding a legal issue involving the topic, perhaps because they are related to John McIlvogue or they are John McIlvogue.ScottishFootballObseasive (talk) 11:27, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

:Given that there is no way of determining that the individual involved in the 2008 'legal issue' is even the same person as the subject of the article, I have removed it again. I have also added a Wikipedia:Proposed deletion template to the article, as it doesn't even remotely demonstrate the necessary coverage to meet Wikipedia notability criteria.

:In these circumstances, whether Mcilvogue is the subject of the article or not is irrelevant - the 'biography' has every appearance of being an attack page, concocted out of poor sources with the express intent of drawing attention to the 'legal issue'. Wikipedia does not host attack pages. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:49, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

::Not an attack page - an article created by a Livingston supporter about someone with a recent involvement in the club. Sources added to indicate it is the same person. ScottishFootballObseasive (talk) 11:56, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

:::You are being Reported at WP:ANI. I suggest you familiarise yourself with WP:BLP policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

• {{pagelinks|Draft:Dr. Prasoon Pootheri}}
• {{userlinks|Prasoonputheri}}

Possible Conflict of Interest. See their Contribs. Pibx (talk) 17:53, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

: Or you could have just included the link for the only page the user has editted. -- Pemilligan (talk) 17:58, 28 May 2025 (UTC)