Talk:World Patent Marketing

Edits due to Matthew Whitaker being appointing acting Attorney General (since Nov 7th)

This article was created on Nov 7th immediately after Trump appointed Matthew Whitaker as acting Attorney General, and since then it has gone under several dozen updates within a week.

Please keep in mind:

• Wikipedia is not a news source, and that applies here since most of the sources being used for the article are only days old.
• Double-check other people's sources and be wary of vandalism
• All sources need to be cited from a reliable source
• Keep the tone factual and neutral, and leave out the opinions.

odd

This case was settled a year ago, and just now deserves a WP article because of Matthew Whitaker who was not named as a defendant. FTC v World Patent Marketing, Desa Industries, and Scott Cooper. 25 May 2017. The WPM advisory board according to Cooper included scientist Ronald Mallet, biology Prof Aileen Marti, karate champ Moti Horenstein, former US Attorneys, Pres Obama's advisory council members, military generals, famous doctors. Rep Brian Mast received a $5,600 campaign donation from Cooper and claims he was surprised to find his name on the board. -- Naaman Brown (talk) 16:51, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Naaman Brown: Thanks for your contributions! Actually, the case was settled in May of this year, although the company was ordered to cease operations in 2017. Are you suggesting that there is a WP:UNDUE problem? Or is it something else? Thanks again. Informata ob Iniquitatum (talk) 19:35, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

BLPN notice and a bit of information

There is an ongoing discussion at BLPN

• Miami New Times initially broke the story (according to The NYTimes).
• That same NYTimes article also states: World Patent Marketing was founded in 2014 and had the hallmarks of a legitimate business. I think that helps explain why such notable people agreed to be members of the advisory board, not to mention a bit of financial persuasion. The Times also quoted WPM news releases about Whitaker, which implies to me, that if those news releases are good enough for the NYTimes, we should be able to do the same per our own WP:SELFSOURCE guideline if no other source is available - of course, context matters, and secondary sources are preferred.
• When considering weight/due/balance, we cannot ignore the fact that political spin is heavily interspersed throughout most of the news articles in the echo chamber. We must keep in mind that political spin is irrelevant to WPM's fraudulent business practices, and should be avoided in this article relative to any individual who served on the advisory board, keeping WP:GUILT in mind. (See BLPN discussion)
• Politico, CNN, are two good examples of political spin that gave rise to notability for WPM in what otherwise (and unfortunately) would have been just another scam company among many in the field of invention patenting/marketing.
• More spin BUT with credit to MNT for ethical journalism in their after-the-fact publishing of the following update: Editor's Note: After publication, some people noted that A. Rutsky, to whom Whitaker addressed the email, might not have been a World Patent Marketing "customer." New Times searched local court records and dialed six numbers associated with this name, but could not locate the sender. Of course, that update raises questions about the overall reporting of 24 hr news media such as CNN, and one of the reasons I have always stressed caution about RECENTISM and NOTNEWS.
• Amended FTC complaint, see pg.12, Count 1, Deception: #50 (b), (c) and #51 (b), (c) This is a primary source for the purpose of corroborating published material in news sources relative to the advisory board, and their role in the company. See WP:RSPRIMARY - Although they can be both reliable and useful in certain situations, they must be used with caution in order to avoid original research. Although specific facts may be taken from primary sources, secondary sources that present the same material are preferred. The media's political spin relative to Whitaker, doesn't automatically make the material worthy of inclusion (see BLPN discussion); therefore, we must exercise sound editorial judgement to achieve NPOV and accuracy in our encyclopedic content.
• What I'm seeing in a nutshell: WPM "name-dropped" and deceitfully used notable members of their advisory board to earn public trust. Their use of notable people attracted media attention but with a political bent as evidenced by media's focus on Whitaker, which actually carries the most weight in most of the published news articles, so DUE is an unconvincing argument for inclusion of certain material in this article. The Democrats attempted to prevent the appointment of Whitaker over justified concerns that he would end the Mueller investigation, but that didn't happen. Regardless, there is plenty of material in RS that focus on the misdeeds of the company without the need to include any of the fragmented political spin about Whitaker that originated in breaking news articles. Focus only on the company and the facts, not the innuendos, speculation, guilt by association or any other form of politically motivated journalistic opinion. Atsme 💬 📧 15:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Anyone who's interested in this subject may want to look over:

• Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive276#Matthew Whitaker (politician)
• Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive327#Matthew Whitaker, Ronald Mallett, WP:GUILT.
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2018-12-24/Op-ed
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 137#World Patent Marketing, Acting Attorney General Whitaker, Bloomberg, and Wikipedia

and probably the archived discussions at Talk:Matthew Whitaker, too. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:55, 14 June 2021 (UTC)