Talk:NerdWallet/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Edit request

User:Spintendo: Okay, I'll revise that sentence and you can tell me if you approve of the new phrasing. Here's the old sentence I suggested:

Hiring sentence version 1

In January 2014, NerdWallet hired former reporters and editors from news outlets such as CNN and The Mercury News to create reference content for its website.

References

And here's the new, hopefully clearer one:

Hiring sentence version 2

In January 2014, NerdWallet hired former reporters and editors from news outlets such as CNN and The Mercury News to research and write informational articles about financial topics for its website.

References

So, if you were to implement this edit completely—it's row 2 in the table at the top of this request—you would be changing this passage:

Current passage

Subsequently, it generated large quantities of content to help boost its search engine results. Website traffic grew quickly in 2010. and, by March 2014, the website had up to 30 million users. The following year, it raised $64 million in its first round of funding, at an estimated valuation of $500 million.

References

To this:

Revised passage

In 2010, the company grew quickly, with its website traffic and revenue tripling over several consecutive months. In January 2014, NerdWallet hired former reporters and editors from news outlets such as CNN and The Mercury News to create reference content for its website. By March 2014, the website had up to 30 million users.

References

Okay, I'll now let you review and make a decision. I appreciate your patience, working through the nuts and bolts of this request with me. Thanks, and talk soon! — Preceding unsigned comment added by KB at NerdWallet (talk • contribs) 11:47, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Reply 30-SEP-2023

Declined Per WP:TOOMANYREFS. The edit request contains an instance where two references are bundled together:

1. In the text under the collapsed heading "Revised passage", the second sentence is sourced by two references: Talking Biz News and Inc..

This suggests that both Talking Biz News and Inc. equally reference the proposed text because both ref notes are bundled together. If one reference is usable for the proposed text, then only one reference should be used, not both references. If the instance where both references are actually sourcing different information then WP:INTEGRITY needs to be followed. Regards,  Spintendo  22:34, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Hey User:Spintendo: Sorry, I was under the impression that two sources at the end of a single sentence was in line with the site's content guidelines. To be totally clear about which sources verify which facts, I'll break it up into two sentences:

In January 2014, NerdWallet hired former reporters and editors from news outlets such as CNN and The Mercury News. These journalists were hired to research and write informational articles about financial topics for NerdWallet's website.

The TBN piece specifies that the journalists were hired from fairly large, reputable news outlets. And the Inc. piece describes, in greater detail than the TBN one, precisely what those folks were hired by NerdWallet to do. Does that work for you? KB at NerdWallet (talk) 18:10, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

It does indeed work for me. But as I recall, there was an additional sentence which preceded these two, something about the company "growing quickly" that you had asked to be included. Is that still a part of your requested additions, or are the corrected sentences above all that is to be added? Please advise and I will make the changes. When ready to proceed, kindly change the {{Edit COI}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=y to |ans=n. Regards,  Spintendo  19:40, 3 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, great. Thanks for helping me refine the passage, User:Spintendo. And you're right that there was surrounding language. Here's the current passage:

Current passage

Subsequently, it generated large quantities of content to help boost its search engine results. Website traffic grew quickly in 2010. and, by March 2014, the website had up to 30 million users. The following year, it raised $64 million in its first round of funding, at an estimated valuation of $500 million.

References

And here is the revised passage, with those couple of hiring sentences we've agreed are solid:

Revised passage

In 2010, the company grew quickly, with its website traffic and revenue tripling over several consecutive months. In January 2014, NerdWallet hired former reporters and editors from news outlets such as CNN and The Mercury News. These journalists were hired to research and write informational articles about financial topics for NerdWallet's website. Over the course of 2014, the website had approximately 30 million users. The following year, NerdWallet raised $64 million in its first round of funding, at an estimated valuation of $500 million.

References

In going back through this, I discovered a few minor errors and corrected them. The Xconomy article link is dead, so I created a citation with an archived link. I also fixed the sentence about 2014 users, to more closely reflect what the cited source says. And lastly, I lopped some redundant references off the end of the last sentence, to avoid a "too many refs" issue.

Please compare those two passages and tell me what you think. I believe what I've drafted is an improvement over the current passage because it organizes events chronologically and adds a little bit of detail to certain events, so that they're more legible for a general audience. But your mileage may vary. Thanks again! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 22:36, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Unable to implement.

1. You've used the ref name "Xcon" in your proposed text. This ref name is already used in the article, however, the details in the citation template you've configured in your request under the Xcon name differ from the details that exist in the instances where that ref name is currently used in the article.
2. If implemented, the formatting you've created for your edit request will generate the Cite error: The named reference "Xcon" was defined multiple times with different content error message to display in the article's References section.
3. To implement your request, please ensure that the instances of the Xcon ref name in both the live article and in the requested additional text match each other in every respect.

Notes

Regards,  Spintendo  19:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

Updating a reference within the article

Per User:Spintendo's feedback above, I'm asking that editors update a reference within the code of the article. The current version of the reference contains a dead link, so I've created one with an archived link.

Each iteration of this version of the reference:

<ref name=Xcon>{{cite web |last1=Tansey |first1=Bernadette |date=21 May 2015 |title=NerdWallet's Big Ambitions |url=http://www.xconomy.com/san-francisco/2015/05/21/nerdwallets-big-ambitions-personal-finance-app-aims-for-dominance/?single_page=true |publisher=[[Xconomy]] |access-date=June 28, 2015}}</ref>

Needs to be replaced with this version:

<ref name=Xcon>{{cite web |last1=Tansey |first1=Bernadette |date=21 May 2015 |title=NerdWallet's Big Ambitions |url=http://www.xconomy.com/san-francisco/2015/05/21/nerdwallets-big-ambitions-personal-finance-app-aims-for-dominance/?single_page=true |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150610130618/http://www.xconomy.com/san-francisco/2015/05/21/nerdwallets-big-ambitions-personal-finance-app-aims-for-dominance/?single_page=true |archive-date=June 10, 2015 |publisher=[[Xconomy]] |access-date=June 28, 2015}}</ref>

The reference currently appears in the article five times, I've listed each existing sentence below, with the new version of the reference:

• In the first paragraph of History, at the end of the sentence: Its first product was a web application that provided comparative information about credit cards.
• Also in the first paragraph of History at the end of the phrase: by March 2014, the website had up to 30 million users.
• At the end of the first paragraph of History, at the end of the sentence: The following year, it raised $64 million in its first round of funding, at an estimated valuation of $500 million.
• In Products and services at the end of the phrase: Its web site is directed primarily towards Millennials
• Also in Products and services, at the end of the sentence: In exchange for new customers, affiliated banks pay NerdWallet a success fee.

This will allow anybody who's inclined to consult the cited article. Thanks! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 21:06, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

References

The COI editor needs to provide all of the verbatim text that needs to be changed, this includes the verbatim references and the verbatim text which accompanies those references. Currently, your request gives directions of where those referneces are located (and the corrected reference itself), but it does not provided the verbatim text which accompanies the reference to be changed. All of these items must be provided with the request. As Wikipedia is a volunteer project, this type of formatting is expected to be completed by the COI editor prior to submitting a request for review.

Notes

Regards,  Spintendo  22:17, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Spintendo: I think you missed the verbatim text in my post above, that is what I included in the bulleted list. The exact article text is there, with the precise reference locations included to make it easier to cut and paste.

As another option: would you like me to replace the reference instances myself? I'm hesitant to touch the article, as a COI editor, but this isn't an editorial issue. It's just making sure a particular reference is functional. That might be easier than going back and forth on trying to explain where each reference needs to be replaced, with me confused by your feedback and you confused by my post. I really don't want to take up a lot of your time with something that would be pretty quick for me to update. With your go-ahead, I can make the fix. Thanks, KB at NerdWallet (talk) 19:47, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

I can handle the changes thank you. There is an instance where you have 3 references verifying the exact same sentence. This needs to be corrected. Regards,  Spintendo  20:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Spintendo: Those three references are used in the text of the existing article. That's not my doing. I've provided the full references for them to help with making this narrow request, at your recommendation, that the Xcon reference be updated. Once we update the Xcon citation, we can discuss getting rid of the redundant ones, which my proposed revisions in the request above accomplish. Thanks! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 21:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

That those three references may be currently used in the article is not the issue. You have requested that they be re-implemented with your request (because you've included them in your proposed text). I will not re-implement cases of WP:TOOMANYREFS. If you want the proposed passage to be included as part of your edit request, then those references need to be consolidated. Regards,  Spintendo  22:35, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, I'm not sure this is very constructive, unless one or more of the refs are not actually of any use (e.g. just press releases or other WP:PRIMARY). It's pretty routine (and often desirable, depending on ref. quality and potential controversiality of the claim) for a claim to have more than one citation, and WP:CITEBUNDLE / H:CITEMERGE stuff is actually entirely optional. I have to suggest that it would be more productive to focus on the actual claims and whether they are properly sourced, neutrally written and giving due weight, actually encyclopedic and not indiscriminate, not containing any original research, not written in mangled English, and otherwise compliant with policies and guidelines. We do not need to "stick it" to CoI editors with demands for things that are not actually required. Editors who don't want to fulfill a CoI edit request on some technicality rather than a policy-based objection should just leave the request open for another editor to deal with (in this case maybe one who'll inject a {{multiref}}, if the material otherwise checks out).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

In reviewing COI edit requests, it's helpful if the COI editor and reviewer both guard against the possible overuse of sources. The "packing" of sources (whether unintentional or otherwise) can impart too much weight towards certain ideas. In the above, I saw instances where two or three references (bundled together) were discussing the same event. Whether these references existed in the article prior to the edit request or not, the COI editor wanted to carry over these references into the article as part of their request, which I objected to. As a compromise, I had asked them to increase their level of discrimination towards these sources, as I believed that the article would benefit from having an economy of references rather than an excess. Needless to say, I appreciate your concern and always value your input. Rest assured, there's no "sticking it" here going on. Regards,  Spintendo  03:34, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Addition to Products and services

Hello again. I'm going to pause my requests above, as the review process has gotten very complicated and I'm not sure how to proceed. Instead, I'll propose what I think is a more straightforward request. I would like to add two brief new paragraphs be added to the Products and services section. Click the show button on the collapsible box in order to view:

Extended content

In October 2020, NerdWallet acquired Fundera, a source of financial advice for small business owners. Fundera operates as a subsidiary of NerdWallet.

In 2022, NerdWallet acquired On The Barrelhead, a platform that used proprietary data to generate personalized loan and credit recommendations for individuals and small and medium-sized businesses. Upon acquisition, NerdWallet began to integrate this platform's capabilities into its own products.

References

This new content covers a pair of significant, relatively recent acquisitions NerdWallet has made. These acquisitions have meaningfully expanded the range of services the company provides its users, particularly small business owners. I'm thinking these paragraphs would go right at the end of the section, below all the existing content, but I'm open to suggestions from independent editors. Thanks, KB at NerdWallet (talk) 16:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Without really poring over the source material, this seems reasonble to me, apart from a few style quibbles. While neither of these acquistions appear to be notable, they aren't indiscriminate trivia within the context of the company's history, adn seem well enough referenced. FinTech Futures is not red-flagged at WP:RSN and seems to be a legit publication. TechCrunch appears to be assessed at RSN as good enough for typical article material, but not for WP:N purposes, which aren't relevant here. Ditto with Denver Business Journal. Both of them write a lot of business news based on press releases, but have editorial control and seem to engage in dilligence to make sure they're not spreading lies or other nonsense

On the style matters: Wikipedia would not write "On The Barrelhead" but "On the Barrelhead" per MOS:THECAPS and MOS:TM. We really don't care how the company prefers to style it; we do not engage in weird stylization (especially over-capitalization) to make trademarkholders happy. (And most external sources also render it "On the Barrelhead"). Second, creating one-sentence "micro-paragraphs" like this is rarely good writing in general, and not on Wikipedia unless the sentences are very unrelated and we expect them to develop into fuller paragraphs later. These two should be combined into a single paragraph, since they are both relatedly about company acquisitions and WP is unlikely to have more to say about them later. Next, "that used proprietary data" seems to be a grammar error (wrong verb tense) for "that uses proprietary data". "Platform" in both sentences about On the Barrelhead is a pointless buzzword bingo item that is basically meaningless to users; the first occurrence needs to be replaced with something that actually conveys a more concrete meaning and concisely describes what the company (now subsidiary) does; the second could stand, since replacing the first with something concrete gives the second "platform" a clear referent, but someone might think of a replacement anyway. And "source of financial advice" in the first sentence has similar issues; "loan-applications processor" would be better, judging from my review of what the website is actually for. On the Barrelhead I'm less certain of since I didn't go over it in detail.

A bit of advice for all WP:COI editors: We know you are here wearing a PR hat, but you really need to take that hat off and put on an encyclopedia-writer hat when constructing even a couple of sentences for possible consumption here. Adjust your mindset and your focus to what the reader (of an encyclopedia, not a press release or a company website) needs and expects, not what the company would want in its marketing materials. You are not here to persuade anyone of anything, sell them anything, or impress them, you are here to give them unadored, unmanipulated facts in as clear language as possible. All your experience in "business writing" is like bringing guitar lessons to a piano keyboard. The underlying theory isn't alien, but the technique is radically different, and so will be the output.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:03, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

User:SMcCandlish: I really appreciate the detailed feedback. I'll place a revised version of my proposed content here:

Extended content

In October 2020, NerdWallet acquired Fundera, a company that provides loans to small and medium-sized businesses. Fundera operates as a subsidiary of NerdWallet. In 2022, NerdWallet acquired On the Barrelhead, a fintech company that uses proprietary data to generate personalized loan and credit recommendations for individuals and small and medium-sized businesses. Upon acquisition, NerdWallet began to integrate On the Barrelhead's technology into its own products.

References

Per your suggestions, I have:

• Combined four sentences into a single paragraph
• Changed description of what Fundera does, so that it's more precise
• Fixed On The Barrelhead vs. On the Barrelhead issue
• Changed description of what On the Barrelhead does, to make it less jargon-y
• Changed "used" to "uses"

Regarding the couple of On the Barrelhead's sentences: most press coverage I've seen of the acquisition, including the cited source, uses "platform," so that's the word I landed on. (Other sources: PYMNTS, Fintech Global.) But I take your point that it's a vague term. I've decided to revise that passage so that OTB is now described as "a fintech company" that had developed a unique process for generating loan and credit recommendations. Both instances of "platform" are gone, and I think it's a little more reader-friendly. If someone doesn't know exactly what fintech means, they can navigate over to its Wiki article to get a better sense of the term. Anyway, that's my proposed solution. Let me know what you think.

Again, thanks for the detailed response. In particular, I'll keep in mind what you said about drafting language that's clear and unadorned. Cheers, KB at NerdWallet (talk) 22:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

"Proprietary data" and "personalized" in that material is more marketing lingo and not helpful. But the bulk of this seems fine to me and I'll put it in the article. As always with CoI edits, someone might revert and want different sources or something.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done .  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:37, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again, User:SMcCandlish. I also wanted to propose a rewrite of the first paragraph of the Products and services section, if you're interested. I'll place the existing paragraph and my revised version here, so you can easily compare:

Existing paragraph

The company's goal is to provide information that educates users in making financial decisions. They do so by providing both reviews and comparison of different financial products, including credit cards, banking, investing, loans and insurance. Its web site is directed primarily towards Millennials and provides information on credit card selection and benefits, college loans, banking, mortgage loans, stock trading and insurance policies.

References

Revised paragraph

NerdWallet has a platform consisting of a website and an app, which provides financial guidance to consumers and small and medium-sized businesses. It features comparison tools for financial products such as credit cards, checking accounts, and mortgages, as well as loan, net worth, and credit score calculators. It also has written articles, researched and composed by its staff. Some of these articles explain basic financial concepts, while others answer specific questions about topics such as investing, retirement planning, and taxes.

References

To briefly explain my revisions:

1. Rewrote the first sentence to reflect what NerdWallet offers, as opposed to what it seeks to do. (I believe "platform" is okay here, because I've defined it as a website and app, but correct me if I'm wrong.)
2. Rewrote the second sentence so that it contains more concrete details about how NW allows its user to compare products and calculate costs
3. Cut the "website aimed at Millenials" clause. That comes from a 2015 Xconomy article. Relevant quote: "Chen says NerdWallet’s website design is skewed somewhat to attract millennials." Given that the cited article's claim isn't that strong ("skewed somewhat") and it's eight years old, I think it's reasonable to strike this. And for whatever my perspective as a NW employee is worth, the company wants to be a financial advice resource for everybody, not just folks within a certain age range.
4. Refined the third sentence so that it's more explicit. Rather than saying NW "provides information," I've clarified that it has articles written and researched by its staff. And then I've provided a brief description of the kind of information those articles contain.

I hope that what I'm putting forward is seen as an improvement. My goal is not to have the section read like a brochure of all the great things NerdWallet offers. I just want the information to be specific and relatively up-to-date. I'll now step aside and let either SMcCandlish or another independent editor review. KB at NerdWallet (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not a one-stop shop for getting CoI edits done; my interest in this stuff is quite low. But I'll generally make time to help make wording more encyclopedic. My initial overview of this is that "The company's goal" (or something like that, "The principal business of the company", etc.) tells the reader something more useful than "The company has a platform ...". NW is using its website and app to perform a business function, to execute its business plan. That it "has" them and likes to call them collectively a "platform" isn't very informative. Wikipedia can't say that a company "provides ... guidance" because that's a value judgment that what the company does is actually guiding rather than attempting to be guiding; "provides ... advice" is the proper phrasing. The rewrite loses "reviews", which might or might not be intentional. Also lost mention of insurance, of college loans in particular, of stock trading in particular, of credit card selection and benefits in particular. Some of these may be intentional, in favor of more general mentions of credit cards and investments, but I'm not sure, especially since the general "banking" was changed to the possibly over-specific "checking accounts". WP hyphenates compound modifiers, thus "loan, net-worth, and credit-score calculators". Several terms should be linked: net-worth, credit-score, credit cards, mortgages, etc.; remember that children use our site for their homework. Websites don't write articles; people do. And compress redundant wording. So, something like "NerdWallet staff also produce articles on financial concepts such as investing, retirement planning, and taxes." Which financial subjects are "basic" or not is a subjective matter. WP probably isn't a position to claim that NW staff are doing "research" in an encyclopedic sense; the cited Inc. source doesn't use that word, and for all WP knows, the research could be done by external contractors. If someone's article isn't just a silly opinion piece then it's already implicit that research of some general kind went into it; no need to specify that. The Millennials bit seems reasonable to remove since support for the idea is weak (a reviewer's opinion about the "look and feel" of a website, not analysis of a business model), and it doesn't seem pertinent to how the site is today (dunno about the app). PS: The above notes are just based on my parsing of the two passages, not a review of what all the cited sources are saying in detail, so I'm not certain there aren't any further "Do the sources actually confirm this?" issues.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

User:SMcCandlish: Thanks for the feedback. I've adjusted the language and formatting according to your instructions. Specifically, I have:

• Changed the first sentence back to what it currently is in the article (you make a good point about it being more descriptive than what I've proposed)
• Added hyphens and links to "credit-score" and "net-worth"
• Combined the last two sentences into one simple sentence about NerdWallet's written content
• Added links to investing, retirement planning, and taxes

Revised paragraph, take two

The company's goal is to provide information that educates users in making financial decisions. NerdWallet's website and app feature comparison tools for financial products such as credit cards, checking accounts, and mortgages, as well as loan, net-worth, and credit-score calculators. NerdWallet staff also produce articles about financial topics such as investing, retirement planning, and taxes.

References

I believe that addresses all your concerns, but please let me know if anything else needs fixing. Cheers! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 18:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Hey, User:SMcCandlish! Just checking to see if you've had a chance to take a look at what I've presented above. Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. Thanks! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 18:34, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done Also cleaned up citation formatting, date format, linking, punctuation, a typo, etc.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  18:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much, User:SMcCandlish! KB at NerdWallet (talk) 05:57, 18 December 2023 (UTC)