Talk:Matilda Hellman

Minor edit

At the end of the first paragraph of the career section, please make the following edit

Between 2011 and 2016, she led the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) project ALICE RAP

to

Between 2011 and 2016, she was in the lead group of the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) project ALICE RAP

She did not lead the entire project. She led parts of the project. HRShami (talk) 06:16, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

@HRShami the source used for that entire paragraph is her CV which is...uh...a long way from ideal. And wrt to ALICE her CV simply says 'research leader' which doesn't support the idea that she was part of a group of leaders. Could you please provide one or more independent sources that can support this entire paragraph, otherwise it should probably be deleted. DrThneed (talk) 00:49, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

@DrThneed. Understood. Thank you for reviewing my request. I have tried using the CV only for the most important appointments in this article, in alignment with WP:PRIMARY. Here's a secondary source for this specific statement. If you search Hellman's name on the link, you will get to the sentence that confirms this sentence: She was in the lead group of the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) project ALICE RAP.

The archive of this project page can also be used. Both references do not confirm the years; for that we will have to use her CV.

Meanwhile, I will search for references for the other information in this paragraph. HRShami (talk) 11:47, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

DrThneed I have found sources for the other information, though they do not completely verify the information. For the dates, we'd have to cite the CV.

1. This source confirms that she as at Nordisk alkohol- och narkotikatidskrift thought does not confirm the year.

2. This source confirms that she was a project leader at NVC, but it does not confirm that she was a project leader at NAD

I have updated the entire paragraph with these sources below.

Hellman began her career in 2003 as a scientific editor for Nordisk alkohol- och narkotikatidskrift at the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). She later moved into research roles, serving as a project leader at the Nordic Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research (NAD) and the Nordic Welfare Centre (NVC) from 2007 to 2011. Between 2011 and 2016, she led the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) project ALICE RAP.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by HRShami (talk • contribs) 05:03, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

For the ALICE RAP project, your Ref [4] seems to be missing.

The archive page you linked shows the role as well, and it is ok to cite archives of otherwise reliable web sites (i.e., not blogs, etc.). The best source would be the final report of the ALICE RAP project, if you can locate that? Perhaps you can draft something, including your Ref [3], the archive, and the final report (if available) to support ALICE RAP. Using the CV to confirm the bare fact of the dates is probably ok if independent sources show her leadership role, but you should not rely on the CV for the whole claim. The less reliance on the CV, the better.

I noticed that the book Hellman (2016) which you had tried to include is an outcome of Alice RAP. You could mention something like "A book by Hellman was an outcome of ALICE RAP [ref]." to help show the impact. If the book has been reviewed or quoted in an independent source, that would be most useful. Again, notability of information through secondary or tertiary sources is preferred. Fiske (talk) 15:22, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

Somewhat separately, there is a review of the 2019 book to which Hellman contributed. It was published in Critical Gambling Studies.

Berret, Sébastien. “Book Review: Sulkunen, P., Babor, T., Cisneros Örnberg, J., Egerer, M., Hellman, M., Livingstone, C., Marionneau, V., Nikkinen, J., Orford, J., Room, R. & Rossow, I. (2019). Setting Limits: Gambling, Sciences and Public Policy.” Critical Gambling Studies 2 (2021): 175–176. https://criticalgamblingstudies.com/index.php/cgs/article/view/119/62

"Setting Limits, authored by an international group of experts, provides a comprehensive review of research on worldwide gambling trends, industry strategies, regulation and related consequences on society. .... It is highly recommended for anyone with an interest in gambling or in public health."

This might help you as you work on the article. Fiske (talk) 15:28, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

@Fiske. Thank you for reviewing this request. I will update the text and support with suitable citations. HRShami (talk) 06:58, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Fiske. Thank you again for your feedback on this. I have copied the updated section below. The reports are all available for download on the archive page. The link directly downloads the reports to the system so I haven't added it as a reference. The reference 4, which you are not able to see is actually the CV. The ref name is not defined on this page that's why you are not able to see the ref 4. I have added a sentence about Concepts of Addictive Substances and Behaviours across Time and Place at the end of the paragraph. I will add the book review in the research and works section of this article.

Hellman began her career in 2003 as a scientific editor for Nordisk alkohol- och narkotikatidskrift at the National Research and Development Centre for Welfare and Health (STAKES). She later moved into research roles, serving as a project leader at the Nordic Centre for Alcohol and Drug Research (NAD) and the Nordic Welfare Centre (NVC) from 2007 to 2011. Between 2011 and 2016, she was in the lead group of the EU Seventh Framework Programme (FP7) project ALICE RAP. Her book Concepts of Addictive Substances and Behaviours across Time and Place draws on the research from ALICE RAP project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HRShami (talk • contribs) 10:09, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

(I've added an unsigned template to the previous - please remember to sign, which makes it easier to reply.)

With these sources, I have edited the ALICE RAP sentence adding the non-CV, reliable sources. Will look at the rest of that paragraph presently. Fiske (talk) 11:18, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Added your source for the first sentence about the scientific editor role. I've left the CV as a primary source for the bare fact of the dates she was there, since we do not have an independent source for that.

The sourcing on the NAD/NVC sentence is still not complete, as only the CV provides both positions and a date range. Rather than adding another primary source (the one you suggested that is Hellman's own paper & therefore not more independent) I have left this as the CV. The CV is probably ok for the simple fact of appointments and dates, although a secondary source would be much better.

I've also added sentence on the outcome of ALICE RAP (book). This might fit better in a separate section on "Scientific contributions", but there isn't one at present.

I will close this request because the initial issue about ALICE RAP is now addressed. However, we do need additional sourcing for NAD/NVC, and the 2019 book review I mentioned might be useful if further work is done on the article. Fiske (talk) 12:29, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

References

Works

Please add a section of Works with the following text. It was taken out by an editor with the summary "Cut promo based largely on original research". This section is not promotional it describes the research she has done. I have also removed any statement that could be deemed as original research in this.

Hellman has conducted research on gambling-related harms from a public health perspective, analyzed competing policy objectives, and studied how market structures influence consumption and harm. She has conducted research on the welfare state as well, and in a 2017 study, she showed how Finnish government programmes have, over time, started to lose their welfare state ethos.

Hellman's work on online gaming has contributed to research on behavioural addictions and the conceptualisation of gaming addiction. She has also published on the historical development of definitions of addiction and how addiction is framed in public discourse.

Hellman has authored Addiction and the Brain: Knowledge, Beliefs and Ethical Considerations from a Social Perspective, which explores the neuroscientific basis of addiction using epistemology. In 2017, she co-authored The New Governance of Addictive Substances and Behaviours, analyzing the effectiveness of drug policies and highlighting their shortcomings. HRShami (talk) 09:19, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Not done: No consensus could be obtained for making the requested change. I declined the request below which was a request to reinstate promotional content removed by another editor. A paid editor creating two separate COI edit requests to contest removals by two separate editors is disruptive. COI edit requests are only for non-controversial requests, undoing an edit by another editor is by its very nature, not uncontroversial. 🄻🄰 16:11, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

@लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक Hi. Thank you for reviewing the request. Since the content was originally accepted through AfC and I have only made a single edit request regarding it, I would appreciate a second opinion from another editor. I have not edited the page directly, and I do not intend to repeatedly resubmit the same request if consensus is against inclusion. User:Fiske, would you be willing to review this request when you have some time? If I submit another request or reopen this request, it would be edit warring, but I believe the passage above is not promotional and supported by secondary published references. The third paragraph uses two references from WorldCat, which is only used for writing a one-line summary of the book. I am happy to remove WorldCat references if they are deemed inappropriate.

Also about my request to reinstate the list of publications in a separate request below. It is in line with MOS:BIBLIO. This topic has been discussed at length once here and majority view was that selected publications (very limited in number) should be added to articles of academics if they are important in the subject's career. Based on this, I only added books that were published by major publishers. The selected papers are four of her most cited publications. All of this is organized in chronological order as per the guideline. HRShami (talk) 06:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Per the documentation, COI edit requests should not be used for any controversial requests. Here you are, as a paid editor, arguing to include promotional material that was removed by two separate editors. That is clearly not non-controversial. Looking for a friendlier editor to review when I declined it is prohibited by WP:CANVASS which, as a paid editor, you should be especially careful not to violate. 🄻🄰 13:42, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Folks,

I'm responding to the ping from @HRShami:. Also sending a ping to @लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक: to acknowledge that I am aware of WP:CANVASS. By way of background, I have worked on dozens of coi edit requests this year, simply by reading the queue, and those included a couple from HRShami (that, I guess, is why I have been pinged). And, since I am now here, I'll offer some thoughts.

This coi edit request, and the one below it have been rejected.

On the coi edit request below, the question turns on notability. If a few selected publications are in fact notable, it's normal to include them in a BLP. The problem is that notability has not been shown. A person may write 100 papers, none notable, and none of which would be listed because wikipedia is not a CV. You can show notability by published reviews of the work, citations, biographies, and so on. The removed content appears promotional because there's no evidence of notability for those works. If there were a section on research that showed the high impact of a few papers, including those few would be routine in Wikipedia.

On the present coi edit request, the situation is a bit different. The material suggested is all supported by sources citing Matilda, i.e., secondary sources discussing the work, not primary sources representing the work itself. That's good because it implies editorial independence as well as notability. The trouble is that the text still reads like a biosketch and doesn't bring out the notability and impact of the cited work. Did one of those secondary sources say the work was groundbreaking, or that they were inspired in a new direction by the work? If so, you could write: "Smith stated that 'Matilda's study of bluebirds opened a new paradigm in bluebird studies'"[ref Smith's paper] The main need is to show that these citations were not just routine things like "Past work has been extensive [1-20].", where Matilda's paper is [13].

Also, has she received some awards for her work? That would also go toward notability.

I don't have time to go through these references and revise the suggested text. But that's what I think is needed.

As the article currently stands, it's incomplete without some discussion of her research - it just stops after saying what appointments Matilda has held. So HRShami's effort to add such detail is in the right direction, even if the text needs more work.

Finally, there's nothing wrong with making a new coi edit request with new material. What's very disruptive is making the same request over and over. The coi queue is at 555 today, and editors don't have bandwidth to say no to the same thing repeatedly.

Hope this helps. Fiske (talk) 21:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I have to amend my reply for two points that I overlooked before.

1. The original content was been approved by the Afc process, which implies that independent reviewers thought the initially posted content was appropriate. That includes material separately deleted by Flyingphoenixchips (below) and this content by लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक (or LA). Perhaps the Afc editors read the citations that I did not have time for.

2. HRShami has made only ONE request for each change. He or she followed Wikipedia's normal process to contest a deletion, which is to start a discussion on the talk page. That is not considered controversial or disruptive in Wikipedia. WP:CONTENTDISPUTE Requesting multiple additional editors becomes canvassing, but I guess I am the only additional editor HRShami has asked.

All that said, I'd like to see to the text improved a bit, so that notability can be more clear. Fiske (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

With respect, the conflict of interest edit request is only to be used for edits that are uncontroversial or with clear consensus. It is disruptive for a conflict of interest editor to make an edit request to undo an edit since that is by definition not uncontroversial.

Maintaining a list of COI-friendly editors to ping for support is obviously WP:CANVASS and gaming motivated by being a paid editor. If they don't like an edit, they need to open a discussion without pinging for support and get a consensus before misusing the coi edit request template to undo edits since that is not uncontroversial.

In any case, this type of content seems to be recurring through their contributions so I'll be making a point of cleaning their other articles. 🄻🄰 17:04, 7 June 2026 (UTC)

@Fiske Hi. Thank you for you feedback. I pinged you here because you are very active at Edit Requests and because you have a very solid understanding of guidelines about academic profiles. This was not an attempt to WP:CANVASS. You are indeed the only editor I pinged. Based on your guidance, moving forward, I will refrain from adding selected publications if they are not notable in their own right. I will amend the text for research section and submit it here. Thank you. HRShami (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Your post below tagging a specific editor is highly inappropriate @HRShami. Paid editors don't get to cherry-pick which editors review their proposals by tagging them, and I see you've done this repeatedly. It is especially egregious because three editors have participated with you on this article but you are tagging the only other editor who has implemented some of your edits. Textbook canvassing.

Does this need to be brought to a noticeboard or will you cease? 🄻🄰 12:47, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Fiske. I have updated some parts of the research section and added/removed some references. Can you please take a look if this is okay to add to a research section in the article?

Hellman has conducted research on gambling-related harms from a public health perspective, analyzed competing policy objectives, and studied how market structures influence consumption and harm. Her co-authored book Setting Limits: Gambling, Science and Public Policy was reviewed in Critical Gambling Studies, in which reviewer Sébastien Berret described it as "a comprehensive review of research on worldwide gambling trends, addiction and related public health issues."

Hellman has conducted research on the welfare state as well, and in a 2017 study, she showed how Finnish government programmes have, over time, started to lose their welfare state ethos. Her work on online gaming has contributed to research on behavioural addictions and the conceptualisation of gaming addiction. She has also published on how addiction is framed in public discourse, including a 2015 study of press portrayals of "the addict".

Hellman has authored Addiction and the Brain: Knowledge, Beliefs and Ethical Considerations from a Social Perspective, which explores the neuroscientific basis of addiction using epistemology. In 2017, she co-authored The New Governance of Addictive Substances and Behaviours, analyzing the effectiveness of drug policies and highlighting their shortcomings.— Preceding unsigned comment added by HRShami (talk • contribs) 10:28, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

That draft is improved. I've nevertheless reworked several parts of it. I felt that the claims needed to have both primary and secondary sources, for verifiability. I also thought that some of the wording was too vague or too general. I have put my revised version into the article.

I believe that this new text satisfies the the following concerns:

• it is reliably sourced, including secondary sources that discuss Hellman's work (for notability);
• the text is now non-promotional and includes no peacock language;
• the content is a relevant description of Hellman's scientific career as represented in published work and through citations and reviews by others.
• the text includes no synthesis or statements going beyond the sources.

In terms of broader comments on the article:

• I do not believe that this article needs a "selected works" section at this time.
• A photograph would improve the article (upload to Wikimedia, and make a note in a new section on the talk page).
• If Hellman has received some notable awards (e.g., major awards from professional societies, etc.) those can be added.

Fiske (talk) 21:36, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

References

Request to add selected publications

When the article was accepted through AFC, it had a list of publications. These were added based on MOS:BIBLIO. I selected these publications based on how significant they have been in the subject's career as the guideline indicates. I only added books that were published by major publishers. The selected papers are four of her most cited publications. All of this is organized in chronological order as per the guideline. Please add them back to the article.

-- Bibliography --

--- Selected books ---

• Hellman, Matilda, ed. (2016). Concepts of Addictive Substances and Behaviours Across Time and Place (First ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780191801280.

• Anderson, Peter J.; Hellman, Matilda; et al. (2017). New Governance of Addictive Substances and Behaviours. Oxford University Press USA - OSO. ISBN 9780191077968.

• Sulkunen, Pekka; Babor, Thomas F.; Ornberg, Jenny Cisneros; Egerer, Michael; Hellman, Matilda; et al. (2019). Setting Limits: Gambling, Science and Public Policy. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780192549464.

• Hellman, Matilda; Kettunen, Tom; Salmivaara, Saara; Stoneham, Janne, eds. (2022). Governing Human Lives and Health in Pandemic Times: Social Control Policies. Routledge. ISBN 9781032147987.

• Hellman, Matilda; Egerer, Michael; Stoneham, Janne; Forberger, Sarah; Männistö-Inkinen, Vilja; Ochterbeck, Doris; Rundle, Samantha (2022). Addiction and the Brain: Knowledge, Beliefs and Ethical Considerations from a Social Perspective (1st ed.). Springer Nature Singapore. ISBN 9789811909481.

--- Selected articles ---

• Hellman, Matilda; Schoenmakers, Tim M.; Nordstrom, Benjamin R.; van Holst, Ruth J. (2013). "Is there such a thing as online video game addiction? A cross-disciplinary review". Addiction Research & Theory. 21 (2): 102–112. doi:10.3109/16066359.2012.693222.

• Heim, Derek; Hellman, Matilda (2014). "Addiction: Not just brain malfunction". Nature. 507 (7490): 40. doi:10.1038/507040e.

• Salonen, Anne H.; Hellman, Matilda; Latvala, Tiina; Castrén, Sari (2018). "Gambling participation, gambling habits, gambling-related harm, and opinions on gambling advertising in Finland in 2016". Nordic Studies on Alcohol and Drugs. 35 (3): 215–234. doi:10.1177/1455072518765875.

• Sulkunen, Pekka; Babor, Thomas F.; Cisneros Örnberg, Jenny; Egerer, Michael; Hellman, Matilda; Livingstone, Charles; Marionneau, Virve; Nikkinen, Janne; Orford, Jim; Room, Robin; Rossow, Ingeborg (2021). "Setting limits: gambling, science and public policy—summary of results". Addiction. 116 (1): 32–40. doi:10.1111/add.15241.

HRShami (talk) 03:56, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Not done: I agree with Flyingphoenixchips's removal of this promotional content. 🄻🄰 16:08, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Books

Please make a section for books at the end of the article and add this.

• Hellman, Matilda; Kettunen, Tom; Salmivaara, Saara; Stoneham, Janne, eds. (2022). Governing Human Lives and Health in Pandemic Times: Social Control Policies. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. ISBN 9781032147987.

HRShami (talk) 09:10, 24 July 2026 (UTC)

Reply 6-AUG-2026

  Already declined  

• This was declined by लॉस एंजिल्स लेखक on June 4, 2026.

Regards,  Spintendo  18:17, 6 August 2026 (UTC)