Talk:Get the Blessing

Official site URL

https://www.gettheblessing.com/ Jakemcmurchie (talk) 11:09, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

COI tag

@DoubleGrazing: Which editor(s) are suspected of having a conflict of interest here? Jarble (talk) 17:10, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jarble: you mean apart from the one editor whose username is that of a band member? I'd say there are probably one or two others. The problem is, much of the content is sourced to AllMusic, which may or may not be reliable always, so COI editing becomes inherently riskier than if all the info came from a solid RS. Anyway, if you're happy there are no issues, feel free to remove the tag, obvs. Cheers, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:25, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello @DoubleGrazing and @Jarbie01 Thanks for your input.

I don't know if it helps, but my recent edits were simply to add factual information not currently included in Wikipedia. Can you help me understand why that's considered a COI? And what constitutes a Reliable Source?

I ask because I added the information to Wikipedia very much with the intention of helping to keep Wikipedia accurate and comprehensive WRT to Get The Blessing and with no intention to misrepresent. And this was information from a Reliable Source – I and my fellow band members are literally the source of the music!

And it'll help me in future. For example: an unknown (to me) editor has added our most recent release but misspelt its title (it's been labelled '"Pallet"' when it should be 'Pallett'). How does this constitute a Reliable Source? Am I allowed to correct it without triggering a COI banner?

Incidentally, as far as I can tell, all other contributors to the article are unknown to me, so the assertion that "there are probably one or two others" is probably false. Could an article be labelled COI on the basis of a guess of this nature?

Thanks for your help and all your work on Wikipedia. Jakemcmurchie (talk) 13:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Jakemcmurchie,

Admittedly, the concept of reliable sources isn't always straightforward and varies by context, but by and large it means having editorial oversight and a reputation for fact-checking. AllMusic has its uses, but it also has its share of issues: WP:ALLMUSIC tells you how it can and cannot be used on Wikipedia. The trouble here is that half the citations in this article are to AllMusic, and although the other sources cited are reliable, this still leaves a large chunk of the content sub-optimally supported.

You being "literally the source" unfortunately doesn't help us much, as we require published sources, preferably secondary ones, and ones that are also independent of the subject.

As for conflicts of interest (COI), any edit you make to an article where you have a COI is by definition COI editing. Some may be okay, such as correcting an obvious factual error; anything beyond that, and you should make an edit request via the article's talk page. Of the nine edits you've made to this article, some may be okay, but others probably aren't.

There is a related problem, in that you haven't disclosed your COI as required. I will post a message on your talk page with instructions on how to do that.

As for others who have contributed to this article, my guess (and it is only that) would be that there are one or more with a possible COI, but of course I don't know that for sure, any more than you can know for sure that that isn't the case, as Wikipedia allows anonymous editing. To be clear, though, the COI tag is applicable regardless of how many COI editors are involved, so it would still be correctly applied if none of other contributors had a COI.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

It does. Thanks. Jakemcmurchie (talk) 18:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Well, I say it does, but your explanations are much more understandable than the official Wikipedia documentation! It's really not clear how I should declare my COI. Can I propose changes here? Jakemcmurchie (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)