Wikipedia talk:Conflict of interest/Burger King open letter

Why this page

This is a second attempt. The first at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard open letter was a good start but so broad and wordy that I decided to start again. This is more focussed.

And in that it's already published, feel free to sign up. Sign and date with four tildes, and you're signing the version as it is when you sign. If you want to sign a later version, just edit the page by replacing your sig with s fresh one.

And there is no reason not to sign both this and other letters (notably the first attempt, above) if you are so inclined. Andrewa (talk) 23:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a promising alternative. Very to the point. —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR░ 23:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Protest open letter vs WMF?

I still wonder if a note may be good to add about it not being the official voice of the foundation (see my question here). Thanks, —░]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR░ 23:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have no objection to adding such a clause. I don't think it's necessary, but hey, consensus works well when we all win the things that really matter to us and don't fret about other things. Andrewa (talk) 00:15, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We say in the first line that this comes from Wikipedians. I do not think we need to stipulate that it does not come from the WMF. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sign here

No, sign at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Burger King open letter#Signed by. TIA Andrewa (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Crowd spanking

When I Google wikipedia burger king letter I get 601,000 ghits with this letter as the first, a search on burger king letter is swamped by the McWhopper stunt but we still get onto the second page. Andrewa (talk) 23:58, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]