Talk:ICO Global Communications
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Fleminra - could you please let me know why you keep changing the edits we have made to Wikipedia? We are trying to make sure that there is accurate and updated information on our company on this page, and you keep deleting. We would be glad to discuss any concerns you might have. Thank youICO Corporate (talk) 16:11, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- The text that I removed was identical to text from ico.com, which is marked "© 2008 ICO Global Communications. All rights reserved." Wikipedia's copy of that text, without attribution and without permission, constitutes a violation of ICO's copyright. See Wikipedia:Copyright violations. If you mean to represent ICO here, see also Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. —Fleminra (talk) 01:31, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- It should also be noted that there are issues with that text under WP:NPOV as well. Meus Nomen 10:46, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
We do not believe it is a conflict to post accurate and updated information on our company. We would be glad to speak with you in person regarding your concerns. You can feel free to call us at <redacted>.ICO Corporate (talk) 13:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
- Firstly, you cannot post information for which you retain the copyright. Secondly, the information is not neutral. COI is obvious, as you have a vested interest to promote your own company. Meus Nomen 12:00, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
We are going to have to disagree. What is now posted is not copyrighted language, addressing the concern that we posted copyrighted language, and the information is neutral, not an obvious COI as you state. The way we read the COI language, it would be if we were hyping a product, it is not a COI to provide factual information. There is no 'marketing literature', no 'hype', just factual statements about what ICO is doing. We're being pretty transparent on who is posting, have listed a phone number for you to call in an attempt to understand your concerns. You keep reverting to text that doesn't even have the company's name correctICO Corporate (talk) 18:28, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
1) A username like "ICO Corporate" (what we call a "role account") is highly inappropriate in Wikipedia, and it has been blocked. Whoever is behind that name will need to apply for a username of their own as an individual human being. 2) If there is inaccurate information in the article in its current form, an editor with a COI problem can provide that language here on the talk page, with verifiable references to neutral reliable sources, and an editor without a conflict of interest can check the sources and make the edits. 3) You are of course correct that information is not copyrightable. 4) Never post your phone number or e-mail address to these pages, as this is one of the most heavily visited websites on the planet, and you leave yourself vulnerable to mischief that way. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:01, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Conflict of Interest
It is obvious that User:ICO Corporate has a conflict of interest in this matter. However, it is also clear to me that this user is acting in good faith in attempting to make this article better. I've looked over the current version of the article (which is this revision), and I don't see anything terribly POV in here. I can't stress this enough: Simply having a declared conflict of interest is not grounds enough for automatic reversion, especially when most of the changes are not at all controversial, like the company's name. There's a few things, though, that I'd like to see:
- The page needs to be moved to a more appropriate title now that the name has changed.
- The items that have been added need to be referenced to reliable sources.
Other than that, I don't see any problems with the latest set of changes that User:ICO Corporate has made. This user has been upfront with us regarding the conflict of interest and is working with us through the talk page as was recommended by WP:COI. It would be wholly unfair to punish this user for working within the guidelines we have provided. -- ShinmaWa(talk) 19:06, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- I concur (and said so, in part, above). I've done the move. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
