VRCWiki:Conflicts of interest: Difference between revisions

From VRChat Wiki
(Full COI policy re-write, courtesy of months of discussion and several meetings worth of discussions giving me a general idea of what I should write and cover for examples. I have more to write, but this should suffice for now and it's been like 5 hours since I started drafting this and I'm getting kinda tired πŸ₯΄)
(de-tableify wording while maintaining intent (needs proofread!))
Β 
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Conflict of Interest (COI)''' refers to an individual's status as it relates to any ''major'' affiliations they may have to a given project, whether it be a World, Avatar, Prefab, Community, or etc. Likewise, '''Conflict of Interest editing (COI editing)''' is the practice of which an individual who is strongly affiliated with a project creates a page for said project, or writes substantive edits for an existing one.
'''Conflict of Interest (COI)''' occurs when an individual has significant affiliations with a project, such as a [[Worlds|World]], Avatar, Prefab, or Community. COI editing refers to the practice of someone closely associated with a project creating or making substantial edits to a page about that project.


Conflict of Interest is better understood not just as an individual policy within its own right, but rather as a contextual segment of general editor policy alongside [[VRCWiki:Notability|Notability]], [[VRCWiki:Neutral point of view|Neutral Point of View]] (NPOV), or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research No Original Research] (NOR). COI policies complement the rest by ensuring the worst-case scenarios for each are wholly avoided in the first place- before any edits are even made. For example, Notability ''by definition cannot be self-defined'', and this directly leads into our COI policies preventing first-parties from defining the Notability of ''their own projects'' through page creation.
Conflict of Interest is best understood not as a standalone policy but as part of the broader framework of general editor guidelines, alongside principles like [[VRCWiki:Notability|Notability]], [[VRCWiki:Neutral point of view|Neutral Point of View (NPOV)]], and [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:No_original_research|No Original Research (NOR)]]. COI policies work in conjunction with these guidelines to preemptively avoid potential issues before any edits are made. For instance, Notability cannot be self-established, and COI policies reinforce this by preventing individuals or organizations from establishing the Notability of their own projects through page creation.


It isn't necessarily assumed that an editor with a COI would create or edit a page for the purposes of advertisement- per se, but the fact is an editor with a COI will ''intrinsically'' be more likely to embellish information, curate ''what'' information is present, or [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research treat the page as a primary source.]
It is not assumed that an editor with a COI would create or edit a page with the intention of advertising. However, an editor with a COI is inherently more likely to embellish information, selectively curate content, or [[wikipedia:Wikipedia:No_original_research|treat the page as a primary source]].


== Examples ==
== Examples ==
You would be someone with a Conflict of Interest if- for a given project- you:
Here are some examples of situations where you would have a Conflict of Interest for a given project:
* Created the project.
Β 
* Helped develop, moderate, or facilitate the project itself in any tangible way.
* You created the project.
* Were the sole/initial financial provider for the project. (e.g: Commissioning)
* You were involved in developing, moderating, or facilitating the project in any tangible way.
* You were the sole or initial financial backer of the project (e.g., commissioning the project).


== Policies ==
== Policies ==
The VRChat Wiki has '''two''' fundamental policies regarding COI and COI editing, these being:
The VRChat Wiki enforces '''two core policies''' regarding Conflict of Interest editing:
# <big>Editors who have created a project, or have made substantive contributions to the project itself, are '''completely forbidden''' from '''''creating''''' pages on said project.</big>
Β 
# <big>Editors with a substantive COI on a project are restricted to purely [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Minor_edit '''minor edits'''] for any pages pertaining to said project.</big>
# '''Restrictions on Editing''': Editors who have created a project or made significant contributions to it are strictly prohibited from creating pages about that project. Editors with a substantial COI are limited to making only [[wikipedia:Help:Minor_edit|minor edits]] on pages related to the project.
Pages found to have been ''created'' in violation of these policies ''will'' be candidates for '''swift deletion''', and the author notified soon after through appropriate channels.<br>
# '''Enforcement and Consequences''': Pages created in violation of these policies are subject to immediate deletion, with the author being notified through appropriate channels, such as their talk page or Discord (if applicable).
<small>(at the moment, their talk page and possibly Discord- if applicable)</small>


== Situations that are ''NOT'' (necessarily) Conflicts of Interest ==
== Situations that are ''NOT'' (necessarily) Conflicts of Interest ==
Conflict of Interest is- like many things in life- not strictly speaking a binary definition, but more of a ''gradient of proximity''. When an editor with even a ''slight'' affiliation to a project gauges their own potential COI, it is oftentimes desirable to err on the side of caution and assume they ''do'', avoiding any potential editor conflict. However, there are plenty of situations in which case someone with a potential COI can very much still make constructive ''major'' edits to a project's page; it ultimately comes down to a variety of factors.
Conflict of Interest is not always a clear-cut, binary concept but rather a spectrum of proximity and involvement. When an editor with even a slight affiliation to a project considers their potential COI, it is generally wise to err on the side of caution and assume a COI exists to avoid any potential conflicts. However, there are many situations where someone with a potential COI can still make constructive major edits to a project's page, depending on various factors.


It can help to conceptualize your potential COI with a project by assessing it in direct proportion to how simple it would be to cease your affiliation. More plainly: if it's easy for you to "leave" without any impact- ''you '''probably''' don't have much COI'', and if your involvement is historically in ''the body of work itself-'' '''''you 100% do.'''''
A useful way to evaluate your potential COI is by considering how easily you could disengage from your affiliation. Simply put, if it's easy for you to "leave" without any impact, your COI is likely minimal. If your involvement is embedded in the project's development or maintenance, then you certainly have a COI.


In any case, anyone who feels as though they have even a ''minor'' COI to something they're editing should both disclose the details of that fact in the edit summary, and take ''extra care'' to ensure any written content they contribute follows all of our editing guidelines, '''''especially''''' NPOV.
In all cases, editors who believe they may have even a minor COI should disclose the details in the edit summary and ensure their contributions adhere strictly to editing guidelines, particularly regarding Neutral Point of View (NPOV).


Here are some examples listed roughly in order from most severe to least:
Here are some examples, roughly ordered from most to least significant COI:


==== Having a personal relationship with someone affiliated with a project ====
==== Having a personal relationship with someone affiliated with a project ====
This one is the trickiest to nail down, as it can cover everything from "intimate romantic relationships" to "we're mutuals on Twitter". Only '''you''' can fully quantify the extent of your relationship with the individual in question, and thus qualify whether you could- or even ''should'' ethically contribute to the project's page. Out of all of the examples, this is the one to be ''most'' cautious about; '''tread carefully'''.
This situation is difficult to define precisely, as it ranges from "close romantic relationships" to "casual acquaintances on social media." Only you can fully assess the extent of your relationship and determine whether you can or should ethically contribute to the project's page. This is the most sensitive case, requiring careful consideration.


==== Being a Patreon subscriber, or having made other financial contributions to a project ====
==== Being a Patreon subscriber, or having made other financial contributions to a project ====
Financial contributions tend to signify a fairly strong interest in a project, but are not ''wholly'' indicative of one's affiliation, and can be revoked at any time. While someone in a position of financial support will ''likely'' trend towards positive phrasing, they are still ultimately ''independent'' from the project itself, and do not implicitly share the same ideological expectations or even ''opinions'' on it as those who've put much more effort and work into creating or sustaining it. It is a position still ''very much'' worth keeping an eye on and disclosing, but isn't wholly indicative of a COI on its own.
While financial support for a project reflects a strong interest, it does not necessarily indicate a deep affiliation and can be withdrawn at any time. Although financial supporters may lean toward positive phrasing, they are still independent from the project itself and may not share the same views as those actively involved in creating or sustaining it. Disclosure is recommended, but financial support alone is not a definitive COI.


==== Being a member *of* a project's community ====
==== Being a member of a community ====
Functionally similar to the financial contributors above, except with even ''more'' leeway, independence, and ease of revoking status. Being ''involved'' in a community can mean a variety of different things; whether it's directly contributing content, participating in events occasionally, or lurking a Discord server. All of these fall into different places on the COI spectrum, but are ''generally'' fairly low concern as long as the standard guidelines are being appropriately met.
This is similar to the case of financial contributors, but with even more independence and flexibility. Community involvement can vary widely, from contributing content and attending events to simply lurking in a Discord server. While these activities fall at different points on the COI spectrum, they are generally of low concern as long as the standard guidelines are followed.


==== Having a strong interest in a project ====
==== Having a strong interest in a project ====
Having a general vested interest in a topic or project you're contributing to editing isn't just ''not'' COI but is '''''very much encouraged!''''' Everything you read here on this wiki is contributed by volunteers, and our time- like yours- is very much finite! While we strongly appreciate all of those who donate their time unequivocally to any page on the Wiki that needs it, we also ''very much stress'' the importance of spending your time contributing healthily, even if it's only to the topics that most interest you!
Having a general interest in a topic or project is '''not considered a COI and is, in fact, encouraged'''! The Wiki is built on contributions from volunteers who share their time and expertise. While we value those who contribute to any page that needs it, we also encourage editors to focus on topics they are passionate about, as long as they do so in a responsible and balanced manner.


== A general example that sums all of this up: ==
== A general example that summarizes it all: ==
Let's assume a hypothetical project in the form of a World called "'''Super Fun World'''".
Let's assume a hypothetical project in the form of a World called "'''Super Fun World'''".
* The creator of Super Fun World cannot create a "Super Fun World" page, but an interested community member can!
* '''The creator''' of Super Fun World '''cannot create a page''' about "Super Fun World," but an interested community member can!
* Perhaps that interested community member happens to ''also'' be a Patreon subscriber to Super Fun World('s creator), in which case they're generally advised to disclose that information in the edit summary of the page's creation.
* If that community member is also a '''Patreon subscriber''' to the creator of Super Fun World, they should ideally disclose this affiliation in the edit summary when creating the page.
* One of the 3D modellers for Super Fun World notices a couple typos on the page, and correct them in a minor edit.
* One of the '''3D modelers''' for Super Fun World spots a couple of typos on the page and corrects them in a '''minor edit'''.
* The creator of Super Fun World sees an incorrect date being attributed to an event hosted in the world and makes a minor edit changing the date to the correct one with a valid citation (if one didn't already exist and the error was a typo).
* '''The creator''' of Super Fun World notices an incorrect date attributed to an event hosted in the World and makes a '''minor edit''' to correct it, providing a valid citation if necessary (especially if the original date was a typo).
* A hardcore fan of Super Fun World reads a new development blog published by the creator and uses their judgement to decide some of the information is notable enough for inclusion in the article, writing a new section (or adding to an existing one) with a neutral point of view using the blog as a citation.
* A '''hardcore fan''' of Super Fun World reads a new development blog published by the creator and decides some of the information is notable enough to include in the article. They add a new section (or update an existing one) with a neutral point of view, using the blog as a citation.
...and so on!
…and so on! This example illustrates how different levels of affiliation affect editing practices while ensuring adherence to COI guidelines.


==Conflict of Interest noticebox==
==Conflict of Interest noticebox==

Latest revision as of 15:41, 11 October 2024

Conflict of Interest (COI) occurs when an individual has significant affiliations with a project, such as a World, Avatar, Prefab, or Community. COI editing refers to the practice of someone closely associated with a project creating or making substantial edits to a page about that project.

Conflict of Interest is best understood not as a standalone policy but as part of the broader framework of general editor guidelines, alongside principles like Notability, Neutral Point of View (NPOV), and No Original Research (NOR). COI policies work in conjunction with these guidelines to preemptively avoid potential issues before any edits are made. For instance, Notability cannot be self-established, and COI policies reinforce this by preventing individuals or organizations from establishing the Notability of their own projects through page creation.

It is not assumed that an editor with a COI would create or edit a page with the intention of advertising. However, an editor with a COI is inherently more likely to embellish information, selectively curate content, or treat the page as a primary source.

Examples

Here are some examples of situations where you would have a Conflict of Interest for a given project:

  • You created the project.
  • You were involved in developing, moderating, or facilitating the project in any tangible way.
  • You were the sole or initial financial backer of the project (e.g., commissioning the project).

Policies

The VRChat Wiki enforces two core policies regarding Conflict of Interest editing:

  1. Restrictions on Editing: Editors who have created a project or made significant contributions to it are strictly prohibited from creating pages about that project. Editors with a substantial COI are limited to making only minor edits on pages related to the project.
  2. Enforcement and Consequences: Pages created in violation of these policies are subject to immediate deletion, with the author being notified through appropriate channels, such as their talk page or Discord (if applicable).

Situations that are NOT (necessarily) Conflicts of Interest

Conflict of Interest is not always a clear-cut, binary concept but rather a spectrum of proximity and involvement. When an editor with even a slight affiliation to a project considers their potential COI, it is generally wise to err on the side of caution and assume a COI exists to avoid any potential conflicts. However, there are many situations where someone with a potential COI can still make constructive major edits to a project's page, depending on various factors.

A useful way to evaluate your potential COI is by considering how easily you could disengage from your affiliation. Simply put, if it's easy for you to "leave" without any impact, your COI is likely minimal. If your involvement is embedded in the project's development or maintenance, then you certainly have a COI.

In all cases, editors who believe they may have even a minor COI should disclose the details in the edit summary and ensure their contributions adhere strictly to editing guidelines, particularly regarding Neutral Point of View (NPOV).

Here are some examples, roughly ordered from most to least significant COI:

Having a personal relationship with someone affiliated with a project

This situation is difficult to define precisely, as it ranges from "close romantic relationships" to "casual acquaintances on social media." Only you can fully assess the extent of your relationship and determine whether you can or should ethically contribute to the project's page. This is the most sensitive case, requiring careful consideration.

Being a Patreon subscriber, or having made other financial contributions to a project

While financial support for a project reflects a strong interest, it does not necessarily indicate a deep affiliation and can be withdrawn at any time. Although financial supporters may lean toward positive phrasing, they are still independent from the project itself and may not share the same views as those actively involved in creating or sustaining it. Disclosure is recommended, but financial support alone is not a definitive COI.

Being a member of a community

This is similar to the case of financial contributors, but with even more independence and flexibility. Community involvement can vary widely, from contributing content and attending events to simply lurking in a Discord server. While these activities fall at different points on the COI spectrum, they are generally of low concern as long as the standard guidelines are followed.

Having a strong interest in a project

Having a general interest in a topic or project is not considered a COI and is, in fact, encouraged! The Wiki is built on contributions from volunteers who share their time and expertise. While we value those who contribute to any page that needs it, we also encourage editors to focus on topics they are passionate about, as long as they do so in a responsible and balanced manner.

A general example that summarizes it all:

Let's assume a hypothetical project in the form of a World called "Super Fun World".

  • The creator of Super Fun World cannot create a page about "Super Fun World," but an interested community member can!
  • If that community member is also a Patreon subscriber to the creator of Super Fun World, they should ideally disclose this affiliation in the edit summary when creating the page.
  • One of the 3D modelers for Super Fun World spots a couple of typos on the page and corrects them in a minor edit.
  • The creator of Super Fun World notices an incorrect date attributed to an event hosted in the World and makes a minor edit to correct it, providing a valid citation if necessary (especially if the original date was a typo).
  • A hardcore fan of Super Fun World reads a new development blog published by the creator and decides some of the information is notable enough to include in the article. They add a new section (or update an existing one) with a neutral point of view, using the blog as a citation.

…and so on! This example illustrates how different levels of affiliation affect editing practices while ensuring adherence to COI guidelines.

Conflict of Interest noticebox

If an article primarily (or entirely) contains content written by someone with a partial Conflict of Interest, it will be displayed with the following noticebox:

UserpageCOI.svg
V Β· EConflict of interest
This page was written by an involved party in violation of the Conflict of interest policy, and may be subject to removal. Once this page has enough edits from varying parties, this notice may be removed.

Consider editing this page.

Note, this cannot be used to circumvent the two fundamental policies. Any pages found to have been created in violation of them, even if they contain this noticebox, will still be eligible for deletion.

It can be added to to an article using the following text: {{Noticebox/Conflict of interest}}

See also