User talk:StevenWade

Welcome!

Hello, StevenWade, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Waggers TALK 10:25, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

November 2017

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Production car speed record , as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Meters (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello StevenWade. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:StevenWade. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=StevenWade|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message.

Since you have stated that you work for Koenigsegg Automotive AB there si no question that you have a COI and should not be making any article content changes concerning your employee's car. Please read WP:COI and propose any edits on the article's talk page. so that they can be discussed by editors who do not have a COI. Furthermore, since you describe yourself online as "Communications and Copywriter" for Koenigsegg Automotive AB it appears that you not only have a COI but are in violation of WP:PAID Meters (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I am aware of the COI provisions, which is why I have stated twice, quite clearly, that I am an employee of Koenigsegg Automotive. I've been very clear about that, and I have not made any attempts to change anything on the article page since becoming aware of the COI provisions. My only contributions since then have been to the discussion and I make no apology for that. If it weren't for the points I'm raising, some of them wouldn't be raised at all. I'm new to Wikipedia, so if I've not disclosed my status somewhere that I should have (e.g. on my profile) then please forgive me. It's not me being deceptive, it's me not understanding what's normal around here.

WRT 'minor' edits... I've only checked that box when it is actually a minor edit. i.e. spelling error, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenWade (talk • contribs) 22:16, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

Please sign your talk page posts.

Both of your statements are incorrect.You disclosed your employee status on Nov 13. [1] but not only made a significant change to the article on Nov 20 [2] but marked it as minor. Meters (talk) 22:37, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How do I sign them? The impression that I get is that if I'm logged in, then WP records my username against my post. If there's a specific procedure, I'm more than happy to follow it. Again, this is a newbie error, not an attempt at deception. And it in no way removes from the relevance of the discussion points.

use ~~~~ I didn't say your failure to sign was an attempt to mislead. I said that both of your claims were incorrect. You did edit the article after you disclosed you conflict of interest, and you did incorrectly mark your edit as minor. Meters (talk) 22:51, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also, as requested, let me tell you unequivocally that I am NOT being directly or indirectly compensated to make these contributions to the discussion. Note - I'm not making changes to the page, only contributing to the discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenWade (talk • contribs) 22:19, November 22, 2017 (UTC)

You are a Koenigsegg Automotive employee named Steven Wade writing about your company's Agera RS car's speed record on Wikipedia. There is a Koenigsegg Automotive Communications and Copywriter Steven Wade who wrote the company post about the supposed Agera RS record attempt, and has made other online posts about the car. I believe you are a paid editor and must declare yourself as such. Meters (talk) 22:46, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am a paid employee of the company. I have disclosed quite clearly that I'm a paid employee of the company. Yes, I'm the same person you describe. But I've disclosed that quite clearly and I have told you that I am NOT being paid to contribute to this discussion. No-one else has a problem with this. And does it make the points I raise any less valid? You are arguing semantics, not substance.

You are not just someone who happens to work for the company.You are paid by the company to write about the company's products. You have written online about this particular car and about its speed record. You are a Wikipedia WP:SPA on this subject. I find it hard to believe that you are not editing on behalf of your employer. If you continue to claim that you are not then we can take this to the COI board and see what the community thinks.

As for the content itself, your talk page is not the place to discuss this. The article's talk page is the place for that discussion, and I and others have commented there. Meters (talk) 00:47, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And you are harassing a new user.

You publicly stated that I was unreliable and even in the face of external sources (that you never tried to look up yourself, otherwise I wouldn't have had to roll them out for you), you repeated that statement. I've asked you to argue substance instead of semantics and all you come back with is a threat. I will most likely remain a single-purpose account after this treatment. I've been thoroughly honest, transparent and have contributed to the discussion in a logical, meaningful way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StevenWade (talk • contribs) 06:21, November 23, 2017 (UTC)

I have not harassed you. I have not stated that you are unreliable. I have not threatened you. I simply pointed out that a company blog is not an acceptable source. It's not independent. It does not matter if the information is correct. There are other reliable sources available but someone keeps re-adding the one that you wrote as a company employee. And since you don't think that being a company publicist writing about your car makes you a paid editor on this article I have said that we can take it to the COI board and let the community decide if your COI qualifies you as a paid editor. That's not a threat. That's simply how Wikipedia works. Meters (talk) 20:03, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Meters (talk) 23:09, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have also included you IP address in the COIN. Meters (talk) 23:12, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Production car speed record. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Saying that I am not making edits on merit, that are factual,or honest, is a personal attack. I will take youi to ANI if you you continue these personal comments. Meters (talk) 22:47, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reiterating publicly that I am a COI employee when I'm already self-identified as an employee and am not acting in a biased manner is a personal attack.

You don't get to act in a biased manner and not get called out on it. You do not get to say things privately and not get called out on them publicly. You do not get to act hypocritically by being letter-of-the-law in one respect and flexible in another without getting called out on it. Your pedantry on the 19+11 issue shows your bias and everyone else agreed (quite rightly) that it was an inappropriate way to record the production numbers.

Again, I have been objective and factual in my dealings on that page. I took my whack when you reported me the first time and accepted that I shouldn't make amendments to the topic and I've stuck by that. I won't be bullied by a Wikipedia Cop who's acting inappropriately himself.StevenWade (talk) 06:54, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As I've already said, pointing out a COI editor is not a personal attack. Calling me biased, and hypocritical is another attack. Here's your next warnign. Meters (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Meters (talk) 07:21, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Use those Wikipedia laws, Mr Policeman.

It's all subjective, isn't it? You report me for COI. I disagree. While I openly admit I work for a company represented on this board, I do this on my own time and am not the paid editor you make me out to be. I take my whack regardless, because that's what guys with integrity do. They abide.

You act in an inconsistent manner and I call you out for it, and you're all up in my grille, using this place like a baton.

I only called you out on this instance because you were wrong. The entire board said you were wrong. Deal with it. Treat people with respect and they'll do the same to you.StevenWade (talk) 17:37, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I undid an edit that I should not have. I admitted it and I restored it. Get over it. Meters (talk) 17:40, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If only it was that cut and dried. When Sagenode questioned it, you defended it to the hilt. Others question it - it's no biggie. It's that sort of inconsistency that I'm talking about. StevenWade (talk) 17:53, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The large part of that edit that I removed was a completely valid removal and has not been questioned at all. Get oiver it. Meters (talk) 23:00, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Production car speed record#Proposed new wording for consideration

Hi Steven. I think your proposed wording captures the discussion to date, but will wait for others to comment before posting my thoughts. NealeFamily (talk) 03:42, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I just thought it might be an idea to formally propose something for consideration rather than continuing to debate around the fringes.

I'd urge you to share your thoughts now, if you wish. The sooner we get some discussion going, the better chance we have of fine-tuning the definition and covering off points of concern. Or dismissing the whole thing, if it goes that way.StevenWade (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Koenigsegg Regera weight

The Koenigsegg page for the Regera has two different curb weights claimed. Do you know which one is right? Toasted Meter (talk) 06:13, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We figured that the 1628 kg figure is outdated (perhaps pre-production) while the 1590 kg figure is cited by more recent sources, but we could still use confirmation on this (and perhaps fixing the value on the Regera webpage). Aab254 (talk) 06:16, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]