Policies & Guidelines

What is a conflict of interest on Wikipedia?

A conflict of interest on Wikipedia exists when an editor has a personal, financial, or organizational stake in the content they are editing. Wikipedia's COI guideline recognizes that editors with a close connection to a subject, whether they are the subject themselves, represent them, or are paid by them, may have difficulty writing about that subject from a genuinely neutral point of view.

Common examples of conflict of interest editing include:

• Editing your own Wikipedia article
• Editing an article about your employer or a client
• Editing an article about a close family member
• Editing an article about a competitor to portray them negatively

Having a COI does not automatically prohibit editing, but it does require disclosure and a more careful approach. Wikipedia strongly recommends that editors with a COI use the talk page to suggest changes rather than editing directly, and that paid editors follow the paid contribution disclosure policy without exception.

Editors who edit articles in which they have an undisclosed conflict of interest, particularly paid editors who fail to disclose, risk account suspension and deletion of their edits.

What is original research on Wikipedia?

Original research on Wikipedia refers to any content (facts, arguments, analysis, or conclusions) that has not been previously published in a reliable source. Wikipedia's No Original Research policy prohibits editors from introducing new ideas, theories, or interpretations into articles, even if those ideas are correct.

Wikipedia is a tertiary source. It summarizes and synthesizes information that already exists in published, reliable sources. It is not a platform for original thought, new discoveries, or unpublished claims.

In practice, original research violations are common and often unintentional. They include:

• Making claims that are not supported by a cited source
• Drawing conclusions from multiple sources that the sources themselves do not draw
• Using a source to support a claim it does not actually make
• Adding biographical details provided directly by the subject that have not been independently published

This last point is particularly relevant for clients working with Wikipedia agencies. Information you provide directly, even if accurate, cannot simply be added to a Wikipedia article. It must be supported by a published, reliable, independent source. If the source does not exist, the information cannot go in the article.

What is whitewashing on Wikipedia?

Whitewashing on Wikipedia refers to the practice of removing or minimizing negative but accurate, well-sourced information from an article to make a subject appear more favorable. It is a form of biased editing that violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.

Wikipedia's content policies require that articles fairly represent all significant viewpoints supported by reliable sources, including critical ones. An article about a company, for example, should not omit coverage of documented controversies, legal issues, or significant criticism simply because those topics are unflattering to the subject.

Whitewashing is one of the most common things paid Wikipedia editors are hired to do, and one of the things that gets accounts blocked. Wikipedia's editorial community is experienced at identifying edits that systematically remove negative information, particularly when those edits come from accounts with an apparent connection to the subject.

This is something Legalmorning will not do. We will work within Wikipedia's policies to ensure your article is accurate and fairly presented, but we will not remove accurate, well-sourced negative information on your behalf. Any agency that tells you they can guarantee the removal of negative Wikipedia content is either lying or operating outside Wikipedia's guidelines.

What is Wikipedia's Golden Rule?

Wikipedia does not have a single official policy called "the Golden Rule," but the principle that experienced editors most commonly refer to in that spirit is the neutral point of view, or NPOV, policy.

Wikipedia's NPOV policy requires that all articles be written from a neutral standpoint, representing significant views fairly and without bias. It is the foundational content policy from which most other Wikipedia editorial standards flow. When editors disagree about content, NPOV is almost always the framework used to resolve the dispute.

In practical terms, NPOV means:

• Articles should not advocate for any particular point of view
• All significant perspectives on a topic should be fairly represented
• The relative weight given to different viewpoints should reflect how prominently those views are covered in reliable sources, not the preferences of the editor
• Promotional language, laudatory descriptions, and puffery have no place in a Wikipedia article

For clients, this means that a Wikipedia article about your company or brand will not read like a press release or a marketing document. It will be factual, measured, and neutral. If that is not what you are looking for, Wikipedia is not the right platform for your goals.