Template:Edit COI/Instructions#For reviewers

This help page is a how-to guide. It explains concepts or processes used by the Wikipedia community. It is not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines, and may reflect varying levels of consensus.

Shortcut Template:RE/ITemplate:RE/I

1. To request an edit to an article where you have a conflict of interest, go to the talk page of that article, and start a new section at the bottom of the page. Put {{edit COI}} at the top of the new section, below the new heading. Use {{edit COI|N}} if you are unfamiliar with the COI guidelines and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Use {{edit COI|R}} for significant additions and re-writes.
2. Below the {{edit COI}} template, add the particulars of your proposed edit.
3. Reliable sourcing that verifies suggested content is the lifeblood of Wikipedia articles. Almost any edit you suggest should be accompanied by citation to a reliable source – and often by a secondary and independent source, rather than a primary source. For details of how to cite sources, please see Help:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1. For a more complex treatment, see Wikipedia:Citing sources. Please note whether or not the sources you are referencing appear in the article already, and if so, format accordingly.
4. Explain what this article is about as not every editor will be familiar with the subject. Copying the first sentence from the article, for example "Meera Dewan is a social-issue documentary filmmaker based in New Delhi, India." is often enough.
5. Indicate if information should be added to the article or subtracted from it.
6. Describe the requested changes in detail. This includes the exact proposed wording of the new material, the exact proposed location for it, and an explicit description of any wording to be removed, including removal for any substitution. Include the sources (per above) that support the edits that you are suggesting; if you do not, your request will be denied. Be specific: "add X", "delete Y", "replace X with Y". If the rationale for a change is not obvious (particularly for proposed deletions), explain. Sign your post using four tildes (~~~~).
7. Other than short quotes, clearly indicated to be copied material by the use of quote marks, followed immediately by an inline citation, all content must be written entirely in your own words, with the cited sources used to verify the information, but not the words and sentences used. Almost any content you find online or elsewhere is copyrighted (even if you find no associated copyright symbol), and its copying into Wikipedia is illegal copyright infringement and, separately, unethical plagiarism. Superficial modification by changing a word here and there from the original material is not sufficient to avoid copyright infringement. These principles are true even if you own the copyrighted material, because we cannot use that previously written material unless it is released under a suitably free copyright license (or into the public domain).
8. The proposed edit must comply with Neutral point of view, and in particular Due and undue weight, a section of our neutrality policy. The Wikipedia article must reflect, both in content and tone, the body of high-quality, independent literature that exists on the subject in question. Ensure that your writing does not sound like an advertisement.
9. Do not upload a photo with a logo added to it. See WP:WATERMARK policy.
10. It is better not to propose major rewrites of articles or sections of articles where you have a conflict of interest. See WP:COI. The article must include any negative material or controversies found in reliable sources. Good reviewers will look for such omissions. Do not ask that negative material be removed if it is well-sourced and accurate.

1. Do not insert major re-writes or controversial requests without clear consensus. When these are requested, ask the submitter to discuss the edits instead with regular contributors on the article's talk page. You can use {{edit COI|D|D}}.

2. Please check the suggested content for copying from existing sources as an initial task – copyright infringement is a pervasive problem and it is not only important that we don't host such material, but it often leads to significant additional work when not caught early. One way to search for them is to copy and paste into a search engine such as Google (between quotation marks) a limited but unique portion of the suggested text, and try a few such snippets from each paragraph. See also this tool. Also check the sources provided for the accompanying citations for copying from them (if sources are not provided, that will often be a separate basis to deny the requested edit).

   If the submission contains material that has been copied from elsewhere and the source is not released under a suitable free license or into the public domain, immediately decline the request as a copyright violation. The talk page itself may need to be cleaned of the infringements from the requested edit, though this is not nearly as important as doing so in articles – and not becoming the tool of infringement by placing requested edits that are violations without checking. If you need to clean up an infringement, the copyvio section at the "quick fail" reviewing instructions at Articles for Creation may be useful by analogy (click "show" in the pink bar).

3. Reviewers must make sure that the proposed edit does not violate NPOV, and in particular UNDUE. The Wikipedia article must reflect, both in content and tone, the body of high-quality, independent literature that exists on the subject in question, not only the sources the submitter has offered.
4. Be on the look-out for cherry-picking, for the omission of material or sources, for the misrepresentation of a source's tone, and for the use of source material out of context. Be vigilant about omissions and tone when a paid editor proposes a major rewrite of a contentious article or section of an article.
5. If the edit is reverted, it is by definition controversial, so do not revert back.
6. Copyright attribution: Not only should you check for copyright problem with the suggested edit, per above, but if you implement a request you need to provide copyright attribution, since you are making an edit as a proxy for someone else. This is done by attributing the changes/additions to the editor who made the request, with their username hyperlinked. The best and easiest way to do this is in the edit summary accompanying your implementation. A suggested edit summary form to do so: "Content changes/additions per edit request on [[Talk:Name of page|talk page]] by [[User:Name of user]]."

This template is used on many pages and changes may be widely noticed. Test changes in the template's /sandbox or /testcases subpages, or in your own user subpage. Consider discussing changes on the talk page before implementing them.

If you plan to make breaking changes to this template, move it, or nominate it for deletion, please notify COI Request Tool's maintainer at User talk:Terasail/COI Request Tool as a courtesy. Thank you!

Requested edits backlog
(COIREQTable updates)

High COI requested edits backlog
{{edit COI/backlog}}

[view • purge]

---

184 requested edits

Are you here because you have a conflict of interest or are a paid editor? The Edit Request Wizard may be all you need.

Go to the article's Talk page and click the Add topic tab.^[a] Add and fill in the following:

{{edit COI}}
* Specific text to be added or removed: ADD TEXT HERE
* Reason for the change: ADD TEXT HERE
* References supporting change: ADD URL AT LEAST
~~~~

In further detail:

1. Add topic^[a] on the talk page, with a subject like Some proposed changes
2. In the large empty text area, type {{edit COI}} (do not indent the template with : or *)
3. Underneath this, write out the specific changes you want made to the article. Volunteers are less likely to respond to unclear or open-ended requests. Using {{TextDiff|1=Existing text|2=Your proposed text}} here will help make your intent clear.
4. At the end, sign the post using four tildes: ~~~~
5. Click on the Show preview button and have a look to make sure the request appears the way you want it to
6. If you wish to make any corrections or additions, you may do so in the edit box below the preview (scroll down to see this box); preview your post as many times as you wish, and when you are satisfied, click on the Publish changes button

{{edit COI}} = {{edit COI/request}} for requested edits. Post on the article talk page, in a thread that describes the edit to be made. The template automatically adds the request to the list of edits requested and Category:Wikipedia conflict of interest edit requests.

{{edit COI|R}} = {{edit COI/significant}} same function as {{edit COI}} – use for more substantial changes.

{{edit COI|N}} = {{edit COI/new}} for new editors.

Editing a subject in which one has a conflict of interest (COI) is strongly discouraged. Attempts at it rarely comply with our neutral point of view policy, and tend also to fail verifiability policy. They are often so problematic that they must be immediately reverted. Users who make a habit of policy-noncompliant COI edits are likely to get indefinitely blocked (or banned from their COI topic if they are otherwise productive here).

While certain kinds of COI editing are not absolutely forbidden (as long one's COI is clearly disclosed), and as with most Wikipedia policy matters there's a spectrum of opinion about what is permissible versus what is best, the "be on the safe side" advice is to use this template to request COI edits instead of making them directly.

While no one will fault you for avoiding COI editing, many will fault you for engaging in it even if a few might not in instances when you did it very carefully.

It will often turn out to be the case that an intended COI edit is problematic for specific reasons which other editors can address in the course of a request and its discussion. A frequent factor is that a fact, in bare form, is actually encyclopedically pertinent to include, but the requester's approach to the wording is impermissibly promotional or otherwise biased, and/or they have attempted to rely on self-published materials for a claim that requires independent reliable sources. Experienced editors with no connection to the subject can help work through such problems so that the intended fact can be added to the article, properly.

One way of looking at this: Ask not "What can I get away with – what barely skates under the policy line?" Ask instead "What is best for readers – what most ensures the encyclopedic quality of the coverage of this subject?"

• {{edit COI|A}} = {{edit COI/accepted}} for accepted edits that have been implemented; adds the request to Category:Implemented requested edits (the template also accepts |answered=yes or |ans=yes)
• {{edit COI|G}} = {{edit COI/proceed}} for allowing the COI editor to directly implement the requested edits to article themselves.
• {{edit COI|P|[see below]}} = {{edit COI/partial}} for partially completed requests adds the request to Category:Partially implemented requested edits
• {{edit COI|D|[see below]}} = {{edit COI/declined}} for declined request; adds the request to Category:Declined requested edits

When declining a request, either using P or D, an optional second parameter can be given to further explain why the request was declined (for example, {{edit COI|P|ADV}} for a partial-block decline for advertising). The additional text values are given below.

ADV

Some or all of the changes may be promotional in tone.

V

Some or all of the changes weren't supported by neutral, independent, reliable sources. Consider re-submitting with content based on media, books and scholarly works.

O

The suggested edits are good, but the reviewer felt omissions in the content may create balance issues.

R

The changes suggested removing content that is well-cited or where sources exist.

D

The reviewer would like to request the editor with a COI attempt to discuss with editors engaged in the subject-area first.

S

The request was not specific enough. You may consider leaving your comments on the Talk page or escalating significant issues to the conflict of interest noticeboard.

T

A reviewer felt that this edit would not improve the article.

C

A consensus could not be reached.

custom rationale

Adds a custom rationale supplied by the editor

Please see the list of requested edits at the Template:Edit COI/Instructions § Current requested edits page to see how you can help!

• {{edit template-protected}}
• {{edit semi-protected}}
• {{edit partially-blocked}}
• {{edit fully-protected}}
• {{edit interface-protected}}
• {{TextDiff |1=Original text |2=Proposed text}} – a handy way to describe your desired changes.
• {{COI edit}}, a redirect to this template