Policy Unication wiki page had content deleted by an employee - suspicious? odd?

[jabbeaux]

Noticed the wiki page about Unication

Unication Voice Pager Receivers - The RadioReference Wiki

wiki.radioreference.com

shows an edit history where a manufacturer account "UnicationKelly" made some edits to delete content. I'm not sure why as the link they removed did work, and still does. Seems odd a manufacturer would make an edit, both for ethical reasons but also without footnote or explanation given the link did work then and still does. And their website right now still lists that firmware as the "current' version.

Edit history

Revision history of "Unication Voice Pager Receivers" - The RadioReference Wiki

wiki.radioreference.com

Could my fellow wiki editors help me understand when we allow the manufacturer to make edits, and what the proper documentation is when removing content (that isn't stale or dead info)?

 

[ka3jjz]

You must understand that the wiki is a public resource for RR members. If this individual who changed the wiki is a member s/he can change it as they see fit. While there are certain restrictions to things we allow here, these changes are well within spec. There are certain pages that are locked down that support the wiki's structure, but this isn't one of them. I'll let Bob AK9R make further comments since he is technically the wiki admin

Mike

 

[jabbeaux]

Thanks ka3jjz. I fully agree the wiki can - and even should - be changed by nearly anyone. While edit history shows I've put a lot of work into that page, I take no umbrage in others improving it. Indeed, I hope people do and have publicly encouraged others to edit.

What caught my eye, and where clarification from wiki admins would help me, is understanding primarily two things.

1. Under what conditions is it permissible to delete content from a page. When doing so, what are best practices for documenting why, and avoiding even the appearance of nefarious activity.
2. What's RR's Conflict of Interest Policy. For example, wikipedia has an extensive description of their policy here Wikipedia:Conflict of interest - Wikipedia . I realize their policy is not ours, however, and maybe we do allow (encourage?) companies to self-edit their own wiki pages. Or maybe it's just that we have no policy on this at all.

As regards the current edits and barring that person's explanation, I tend to view through the lens of the now-famous quote "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence." But I would hope the company would have the good sense to realize how terribly bad it looks for them to vandalize (defined here) a page about their hardware.

 

[AK9R]

Since the history of edits is visible in the Wiki, it's easy for someone to see what was changed. If there is evidence of nefarious activity, I can revert the edits and even ban the person who took the nefarious action.

Conflict of Interest? The RR Wiki is a user-editable resource. If a legitimate user edits a page, I'm not sure how conflict of interest applies. I have no issues with company representatives editing the RR Wiki articles that pertain to their products. And, this generally has not been a problem in the past. If other users feel that these edits are a detriment, users can notify me and I can look into it.

 

[u2brent]

One could always attempt to reach out to a member. Maybe the member could/would explain their actions if they were asked directly.
@UnicationKelly

 

[mikewazowski]

Looks to me like it's a simple case of Unication cautioning against upgrading to v1.34 firmware. They removed the link to it and added a cautionary note in it's place.

If there's more to this than I must be missing something.

 

[GTR8000]

suspicious
odd
ethical reasons
nefarious activity
malice
incompetence
vandalize

A few attention grabbing words/terms the OP has used in this thread to describe what amounts to a big nothing burger. @mikewazowski summed it up perfectly.

 

[KevinC]

A few attention grabbing words/terms the OP has used in this thread to describe what amounts to a big nothing burger. @mikewazowski summed it up perfectly.

With or without onions?

 

[GTR8000]

With or without onions?

Raw or fried up, either way I'm good! Now I'm hungry.

Since you chimed in...everyone please refrain from using them big words that I quoted...Kevin does not like having to break out the dictionary to look them up!

 

[KevinC]

Raw or fried up, either way I'm good! Now I'm hungry.

Since you chimed in...everyone please refrain from using them big words that I quoted...Kevin does not like having to break out the dictionary to look them up!

It is national hamburger day.

 

[GTR8000]

So it is, ha, didn't even realize!