Talk:Dan Wagner

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Dan Wagner article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 90 days

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

This article was nominated for deletion on 21 June 2020. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: Oscar Williams-Grut and Rob Price (7 March 2016). "Someone is editing Wikipedia to make the founder of collapsed tech unicorn Powa look better". Business Insider. Retrieved 7 March 2016.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view. Bothyventures (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. Setomorp (talk · contribs) Techtrek (talk · contribs) W12SW77 (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

I am submitting proposals for updates for review independent editors, as per paid WP:PAID. I have a conflict of interest as a paid consultant for WhiteHatWiki, which was hired by Dan Wagner, the subject of this article.

1. In February 2024, the first sentence in the Career section, subsection “Powa Technologies" was removed by @Leftguide: for lacking a source. Please reinstate this, with sourcing, as the first sentence of the subsection:

In 2007, Wagner founded Powa Technologies, a company that sold e-commerce services and mobile technology.^[1]

RATIONALE: High-quality source. Information widely reported. Many other sources could be added. Basic factual background about high-profile even in his career.

2. In the Career section, Rezolve subsection, last sentence, please replace the following:

This acquisition remains pending as of 2024.^[2]

WITH:

As of 2023, the acquisition remained incomplete.^[3]

RATIONALE: The source for the last sentence of the Rezolve section is Primary. This statement requires too much possible interpretation to rely solely on Primary. I switched it with an article from the Telegraph in compliance with WP:RELIABLE policy. The sentence was updated to reflect the information provided by the source.

3. Please remove the paid contributor flag added in August 2023. The template says that content on the page may need cleanup because there have been paid contributions. Yet almost every sentence of this page has been scrutinized on the Talk page since 2014. Many editors have weighed in. I count at least 17 Talk page posts since 2014. The page is also heavily monitored and changes without consensus have been reversed. E.g. [1] and [2] This flag is meant for pages where content from a paid editor has not been reviewed. Flags are not intended to be punitive if there are no issues with the page. My disclosure of a COI on Talk coincided with the flag being placed, even though I have never directly edited anything on the page, as per WP:PAID.

According to Template:Paid_contributions:

Like the other neutrality-related tags, if you place this tag, you should promptly start a discussion on the article's talk page to explain why you tagged the article. If you do not start this discussion, then any editor is justified in removing the tag without warning.

It has been almost a year and no discussion has been started.

Thank you.W12SW77 (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

W12SW77 (talk) 16:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: Can you please clarify why you reverted my edit. I read your edit summary, but I am confused as to what you are referring to. This edit seems some what benign. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 20:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not benign, otherwise I wouldn't remove it. This article has had a long history of promotional and misleading content added by paid editors. It is conjecture and promotional and more so there has been several attempts to introduce this exact sentence by various editors in what is essentially non-encyclopeadic content, except for the new reference nicely visible with a image of Dan Wagner, straight from the pr agency. It is an event that didn't happen and is only there to promote. Nothing else. scope_creep^Talk 20:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Scope creep: Thank you for the clarification. I will be more careful next time. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 20:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]