I dug a little deeper into the person who brought up the conflict of interest with the Wikipedia page for Framework and their own citations are over reaching in their definitions. If they followed their own protocols as documented; most of Wikipedia would be flagged as being authored by people with a conflict of interest.
The individual that brought up that you are the primary contributor to the Framework page incorrectly asserted statistics to justify their argument and ignored the fact that because it is a public platform, you happen to be the one to contributing to the accuracy. Thousands of other people could have made the same requests. Your edits happened to be the first and and others recognized they were accurate.
In other words, you were not excluding nor changing information for any possible gain both to you, anyone associated with you, and certainly not Framework. It is actually discriminatory to falsely assert a conflict of interest when there is zero evidence of ANY conflict taking place.
There are literally tens of thousands of pages in Wikipedia that are nearly sole source contributed. It was a little disheartening to see some of this persons other edits/comments (because everything done on Wikipedia is publicly accessible) have taken the same approach to protect their views of the platform.
Conflicts of interest only exist when an individual or group stands to gain unfairly through their actions. It is not immediately apparent what you stood to gain from submitting information to Wikipedia about your knowledge of this subject (Framework).
Thank you for your past contributions and I hope you will consider continuing to maintain the accuracy of Framework and other personal knowledge you have on the Wikipedia platform.
@pkunk thank you for posting that. I could not agree more. @junaruga, please don’t let the inaccurate conflict of interest comments dissuade you from continuing to contribute to that page.
I would appreciate you spending time to check the Wikipedia guide.
On what basis was it asserted that you have a conflict of interest?
The person contacted me saying you “may” have a conflict of interest. That means the person was not 100% sure if I was in the case of a conflict of interest. I was one of the editors the most heavily updating and editing the Framework Computer Wikipedia page. According to the person’s investigation, 85% of all of my edits in my Wikipedia account are for the Framework Computer page. I think this made the person suspect that I might be editing to promote the Framework Computer paid for by Framework Computer. Before the person contacted me, I didn’t write my personal information on my profile page as I didn’t know the info was required as a disclosure for the conflict of interest.
Apart from whether what I am doing is following Wikipedia’s policy or not, what I am thinking is whether what I am doing is ethical or not.
Another concern was the person’s this change removing some of my contributions without mentioning clear reasons. I am trying to clarify the person’s intent of the deletion by asking questions at Talk:Framework Computer - Wikipedia - Deleted contents by restoring revision 1225028792 .
I still have a complicated feeling about editing Framwork’s Wikipedia page.
I took a stab at adding some information to the Framework Wikipedia page on the Intel Core Ultra Series 1. Specifically information in the table of specs. There is probably room in the Wiki article somewhere to highlight the current products and upgrades to the existing Framework Laptop 13 platform. Like the webcam v2, upgraded 2.8K display, hinges, speakers, battery, even the color of expansion cards! I had never edited a Wiki page before.
Woohoo! It was hard enough trying to edit that table and not make it look all hacked together. Glad someone saw the date syntax error and could easily correct it.
Hello all! That was my reddit post above. I was able to finally get wikipedia to set me up with an account and I made the update a few minutes ago. Looks good to me, but if anybody wants to correct it go ahead. I got my information from a few different places, but mostly from framework’s announcement: https://frame.work/au/en/blog/introducing-the-framework-laptop-13-powered-by-amd-ryzen-ai-300-series
For the DC-ROMA RISC-V AI PC, personally I have only added the third-party projects that was in the shipping status rather than pre-order status. Because the future is uncertain. But the information for the DC-ROMA RISC-V AI PC is okay.
@Pengwiz Oh, it seems you got the DC-ROMA RISC-V AI PC seeing the following page! OK. It seems the mainboarfd is not in the pre-order status any more. That’s great!
I want to write the following sentence in the Framework Desktop section on the Framework Wikipedia page.
In August 2025, Framework began fulfillment of the Framework Desktop.
It is obvious that Framework began shipping Framework Desktop in August 2025, according to the following comments. However, I haven’t found any media articles explaining that Framework began shipping Framework Desktop in August 2025. Framework doesn’t have a blog article about that. I hope Framework will write a blog article about that.
I don’t know if there will be a blog on it, but this megathread of mine tracks when batch shipments happen - batch 1 preparation emails went out on Aug 8th.
