Template talk:ConflictOfInterest

message: Isn't this now more a "Not 'Pedia Material" template? I thought it was supposed to be about Vanity.—iFaqeer (Talk to me!) 21:00, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
:Somewhat. It still talks about creating a user page for themselves instead of an article, which suggests that the article is about themselves, and you can write a vanity page about some subject which is not you but closely related to you.
:I'm concerned about this template; I'd like to stress that it should only be placed after a decision has been reached on VfD, since it does prejudge the article. Moreover, others viewing the article really don't need to see it. A more appropriate template would be one that links an article and goes on the user's user page. Finally, I think there's a bit too much jargon — people who commit this sin are usually newbies. I'm going to take a stab at these issues. Deco 07:56, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I made some changes, I hope they seem good. I think it really needs a link to a good page about what Wikipedia considers notable, but the closest thing I could find is Wikipedia: Important. Deco 08:04, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

message: I'm concerned about the layout of theis template. Since it's very often given to newcomers making their very first article, I fear that the big red table will have a tendency to scare away potential contributors. For now, I'm de-table-izing this template on the grounds that it's counterproductive. If anybody prefers that it stay, then we'll figure something out. – ClockworkSoul 03:13, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reverted it to a table.  I got a shock when I discovered articles that I'd tagged — the text becomes part of the article, and is very confusing. Mel Etitis  (Μελ Ετητης) 11:11, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Heya Mel. The table itself is fine, I think, but the color may be a little intimidating for a newcomer to get on his/her talk page. What do you say we make it, say, blue? – ClockworkSoul 13:12, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Table 

message: Should there be a link to Wikipedia:Deletion of vanity articles in the template? Nationalparks 04:44, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link to policy 

message: I realize this template will often be put on the talk pages of users who aren't really interested in contributing to Wikipedia... but I don't like the way it implies that all subjects have to be notable to merit inclusion.  WP:N is not policy, and it's been rejected as a guideline.  Some of the more specific ones are, but they don't imply that all subjects must be notable.  Is there a way to rewrite this so it doesn't look like notability is the official stance of wikipedia for everything?  Mangojuicetalk 14:44, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bothering me 

message: I've modified the template code to work without being passed an article name as a parameter: It's pretty self-explanatory, and I don't think it will hurt anything. Let me know if it's a different story. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 05:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parameterless form 

message: This template barely addresses the issue of conflict of interest. It is mostly about notability. We do not want them to write articles about notable people where they have a conflict of interest. —Centrx→talk • 13:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflict of interest