Talk:Kai Staats

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Astro3.142 (talk | contribs) at 18:49, 30 March 2019 (Citation simplification.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Disclosure

Heimhenge Enterprises was paid by Kai Staats to create and edit this biography of Kai Staats. The Article was created in my Sandbox and published to Mainspace today. Feedback and comments are appreciated. Heimhenge (talk) 00:54, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Username Change

My username has changed from "Heimhenge" to "Astro3.142". This was done to resolve a conflict with similarity to my business name. My apologies for any redirections.

This user previously used another account.



Discussion

Today I noticed this page had been flagged as "Category:Wikipedia articles with undisclosed paid content." I checked the guidelines in the Terms of Use and added the disclaimer you see above before the page went live. How do I resolve this and get the flag removed? Or must I wait for someone to do a cleanup on it? Thanks.Heimhenge (talk) 17:32, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Heimhenge, Ive changed to Better tags but please note that only one person may use an account and accounts must not have only the company name as username. See WP:UPOL, and may I kindly request that you visit WP:CHUS And Request a new name. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 19:51, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the quick assistance RhinosF1. Much appreciated. I see we have several issues here, beyond the one you've already corrected. Let's address the username first. The name of my company is Heimhenge Enterprises. When I became a Wikipedia editor I chose the username "Heimhenge". I read WP:UPOL and don't understand what the problem is. Is it that my company name contains my username?Heimhenge (talk) 21:10, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The main problem for me, as a reader, is not that somebody paid to have the article written, but that it *reads* like an article that somebody paid to write - i.e. an advertisement, or a résumé. If this were not the case, I would never have suspected anything, nor would I have checked the talk page. For starters, the subject of the article is not notable enough (I don't mean this as an insult - he objectively does not meet the requirements for encyclopedic notability) in the fields that this article mentions. He already appears to have a personal website, with a bio and résumé, which should be enough. I don't see why he would pay somebody to write an entry on this website...Thisisallwrong (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Insult not taken. When the subject approached me with this job I wondered the same thing, read the Wikipedia notability guidelines at WP:PEOPLE, and described the criteria to him. I cautioned him that notability might be challenged. He took the criteria list I had provided, pulled together what was needed for citation, and came back arguing that he felt "sufficiently notable". After I looked at what he had assembled, I had to agree. So I took the job. I should point out that Staats meets notability criteria in two categories: academic and creative professional (including software development, film production, writing, public speaking). Perhaps most notable was his development of Yellow Dog Linux and iConji, both of which have Wikipedia articles. I should also note that 6 other editors have reviewed this article and none have challenged notability. Except for the usual background and personal info, everything in that article is there for a reason. Either to support notability or provide background for future additions. His AI software is just now being deployed at LIGO for the purpose of detecting gravitational waves from supernovae, and may yield significant future discoveries in exciting areas like SETI. I rest my case.Heimhenge (talk) 17:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, if you've read the guidelines and think this passes I'm not going to argue about it. With regards to the boxes at the top of the page now (conflict of interest, and advertisement-like style), that's not easy to judge so I'll leave the moderators and other users to make a decision on what edits might be appropriate, if any. Thisisallwrong (talk) 18:26, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you sir. Just trying to do the job I was hired for. I'll get to those remaining banners tomorrow. Thanks for your feedback.Heimhenge (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Heimhenge, Only just seen this. Yes, the issue is your username is too similar as the company name. RhinosF1(chat)(status)(contribs) 16:49, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks RhinosF1. That's what I suspected but wanted to be sure before changing my username. I'll get that done immediately. Heimhenge (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New thread. I have added the source of payment (which I would have thought was obviously the subject Staats) to my disclosure at the top of this page. I assume that takes care of the stated objection about not disclosing the source of payment. May I remove that WP:PAID banner now? Thanks. Heimhenge (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RhinosF1 has already removed the "undeclared paid editing" tag. Huon (talk) 19:31, 12 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Note that my username has changed from Heimhenge to Astro3.142.) I see that banner has been removed. What I'm talking about is the existing banner on this Talk page that alleges "connected contributor". Having now stated the source of payment, may I remove that banner? Astro3.142 (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the banner at the top; I hope now it's correct regarding you, your business and your client. Removing the banner would not be in the spirit of disclosure, which all of this is about. Huon (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I see now why that is needed. It's the standard shortcode for disclosing a paid article. Sorry I missed that. So that "improvised" Disclosure section I added at the top is not really needed at this point? Astro3.142 (talk) 16:38, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind my previous comment. I decided it was best to leave it there, even though slightly redundant. Like you said, it's all about being transparent. Astro3.142 (talk) 01:22, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COI

I need to address the perceived COI flagged by AnomieBOT. There are indeed connections between myself and the subject of this article. First, I was hired by Staats to create this article. I'm a freelance tech writer, and I have worked with him on other occasions. He's one of many clients. As a favor, I did some edits to the article for yum (software). I also created the Wiki page for iConji during a period shortly after my tenure as consultant to Over the Sun, LLC, where I assisted with the pictographic vocabulary development. The iConji page was not a paid job. It was my first real contribution to Wiki, and I wanted to create my first page about a notable topic that I knew better than most. So yes, I have a "close connection" to the subject, but "past association" ≠ COI. I know Staats well enough to write an accurate biography, and I really tried to write the article from a neutral point of view. If anyone points out what doesn't sound neutral, I will promptly change it to comply. Thanks. Astro3.142 (talk) 01:54, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have also removed 6 of the original 10 External Links. They were obviously inappropriate. I failed to read the External Links guidelines as carefully as I should have. That may have more to do with the Advert flag than the COI flag, but I thought I'd mention that since there is some overlap between those two flags. Astro3.142 (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No response to my previous comments for over a week now, so requesting assistance again. I have read all the guidelines linked to in the "Advert" and "COI" banner and believe they should be removed. I read several other biographical articles from the category "software engineers", and the "tone" of this article seems no different than what is used elsewhere. See for example Austin McChord, Vint Cerf, or Fred Brooks. I know I can't be the one who removes the "Advert" or "COI" flags, so I'd appreciate some input into what might need to be changed. Thanks. Astro3.142 (talk) 17:09, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article is full of issues that are a classical product of conflicts of interest. I have removed the COI tag as requested and pointed out the problems more precisely. If you have a conflict of interest, please note that you are discouraged from directly editing the article. If you are being paid to make the edits, you are strongly discouraged from directly editing the article. As shown by my recent edits, the WP:COI guideline has been created for reasons that strongly apply to this article. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:14, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, ToBeFree, for clarifying the issues and being more specific about what needs to be changed. Appreciate the quick feedback. First, I have reread the COI guidelines and understand that my only further activity can be suggestions for edits on this Talk page. So here's my question/suggestion: The last sentence of the Career section is indisputable, as a visit to Staats' personal website will demonstrate. The link is in the info box. This is a statement of what he does, but I'm not allowed to cite Staats' personal website. So why doesn't the Filmography section support that last sentence and eliminate the need for a citation? Thanks. Astro3.142 (talk) 18:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Astro3.142, thank you very much for the suggestion. This may be a valid use case for a source published by the article subject, if Over the Sun, LLC is not considered to be a "third party" per the WP:BLPSELFPUB policy. However, I did visit kaistaats.com and was unable to find a good reference for this. Could you point me to the specific page that you are referring to? Ideally, we'll need an explicit mention of the founding year (better an exact date), if possible both on kaistaats.com and overthesun.com, preferably on a permanent central information page, not a blog post. We must not manually deduce the information from the publication date of a blog post. We'd also ideally need a third-party source that confirms that the production of films is ongoing (2009 may be too long ago), because the present tense of the Wikipedia sentence may else be incorrect. Ideally, a third-party source should also confirm that the film topics are "science outreach" and "education", but we may be able to rely on primary sources for this specific information.
What first seems indisputable may actually require many careful thoughts. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Again, thanks ToBeFree for the quick response. That was my error. The website in question is at https://overthesun.com/. I checked the guidelines at WP:BLPSELFPUB and it seems this meets the criteria. OTS is not just Staats, as you can see from the Team page. Can we actually use that as a citation for the sentence you flagged? If so, please do. And should the website in the Info Box be OTS instead of his personal web page? Thanks. Astro3.142 (talk) 22:24, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Astro3.142, no problem, thanks for the link. The website does not seem to say that Kai Staats founded Over the Sun, LLC, however. I'll probably need a more specific link. The team page and the subpage about Kai Staats do not seem to mention this. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:31, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks again ToBeFree. Really appreciate your help. This bio stuff is tricky, and I understand why it has to be. I have contacted Staats who will ask his webmaster to add the required info at https://overthesun.com/. I'll ping you when that happens, probably some time tomorrow. Astro3.142 (talk) 22:42, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging ToBeFree as promised. Just checked https://overthesun.com/ and I see their ABOUT page now includes the missing founding date. On their TEAM page Staats is now listed as FOUNDER & PRODUCER instead of just PRODUCER. Not sure why their webmaster didn't originally include that. Check it out, thanks. Astro3.142 (talk) 17:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That worked nicely
There is no separate "About" page linked on the website; clicking the "About" link moves the browser view to a section on the home page that appears to contain only the year (2009) of the founding. Manually entering "/about" as URL actually shows an "About" page, but that is empty and does not even contain the text "2009" anywhere in its source code.
Because the exact date is not necessary to prove that the company has been founded 2009, I think we can ignore that. However, the copyright notice in the footer of every page seems to say "© 2016", making me assume that the present tense is incorrect unless proven by third-party articles.
"Over the Sun". web.archive.org. 2019-03-26. Retrieved 2019-03-26.
"About | Over the Sun". web.archive.org. 2019-03-26. Retrieved 2019-03-26.
"Team | Over the Sun". web.archive.org. 2019-03-26. Retrieved 2019-03-26.
"Kai Staats | Over the Sun". web.archive.org. 2019-03-26. Retrieved 2019-03-26.

For the record, the original sentence was:

In 2009 Staats founded Over the Sun, LLC, where he produces films primarily focused on science outreach and education.

I am now replacing this by:

In 2009 Staats founded Over the Sun, LLC, a company primarily focused on science outreach and education.

Using the following references:

Neither of them is ideal; the biography doesn't even mention the year or the founding. For the specific Wikipedia sentence, it will suffice, but I'm doing this with a modest feeling of doubt. This is not good encyclopedic style, but it is "good enough" to implement the request. The lack of independent sources throughout the article raises the question if Graeme Bartlett may like to reconsider their initial review. The reviewed revision was Special:PermanentLink/880187161 and would hopefully not have passed AfC. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:35, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good news everyone (especially ToBeFree). I think we can now simplify that 3-bullet citation in ref 15. I didn't much like it either. 3 links to support one sentence!? Turns out a WordPress update crashed their website. When I heard the webmaster was gonna have to do some major work I suggested they rewrite their About page to include all the info needed to support the cited sentence. I think that's the only URL we need there now. Here it is: https://overthesun.com/about/. What do you think? Astro3.142 (talk) 18:49, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]