Draft talk:WayBetter

Unsure about COI

Hi, I might have a COI with WayBetter. I am an independent scientific researcher from the Netherlands and have published a scientific article analyzing WayBetter data. I’ve drafted a neutral, sourced article here. I'd appreciate if someone could review it for potential publication. David de Buisonjé (talk) 07:07, 26 March 2025 (UTC)

NOTE FOR REVIEWER(S)

I believe this draft now meets Wikipedia’s notability requirements for companies, specifically WP:NCORP criterion 1, 2 3 and 4, which state that a company is presumed notable if it has received “significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.” This draft includes multiple in-depth, independent, and reliable sources such as: The Wall Street Journal – article on DietBet and financial incentives for weight loss The New York Times and Financial Times – coverage of gamification in health and fitness apps Men’s Health – feature discussing WayBetter in the context of fitness motivation Peer-reviewed scientific studies, including one published in Internet Interventions (Elsevier) and another in JMIR Serious Games The tone has been revised for neutrality, the article is now properly sourced using standard citation templates, and I have disclosed a potential conflict of interest on the Talk page. I am not affiliated with WayBetter in any financial or professional capacity, and my only involvement was in an academic research context, without compensation. I respectfully request a review for potential publication. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Notability

Hi David de Buisonjé. Thanks for you comments and the additional information.

As I mentioned in my comment on the draft, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

In response to your post above, and WP:NCORP generally:

• The Wall Street Journal article does not include significant coverage on WayBetter/DietBet, rather, DietBet is briefly mentioned in an article about betting on weight loss generally: "Four-week games organized by New York-based DietBet, have been run at more than 500 companies, allotting cash prizes to any participant who sheds 4% of body weight. Chief executive Jamie Rosen says 90% of players slim down, averaging a 5.4-pound loss."
• The New York Times article does not mention WayBetter/DietBet at all.
• Financial Times does not mention WayBetter/DietBet at all.
• One size fits all... does not mention WayBetter/DietBet at all.
• Making health habitual... does not mention WayBetter/DietBet at all.

This leaves the remaining 3 journal articles, which do mention WayBetter/DietBet:

1. Put your money where your feet are...: you are the lead author of this article, which was co-authored by Erika Litvin Bloom, an employee of WayBetter.

2. DietBet: A Web-Based Program...: this was co-authored by Jamie Rosen, an employee of DietBet.

3. You Can Win by Losing!...: this article was produced with WayBetter's "cooperation and support."

Given the above, on my view of it, I don't feel the draft meets the notability criteria, including that reliable sources are "intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject".

My advice at this point would be consider adding a brief mention of WayBetter to the Diet rewards page, which seems a much better fit.

I know this will be somewhat disappointing, but perhaps in time if you can find more reliable sources a discrete page for WayBetter could be worth re-submitting for review. Cabrils (talk) 01:11, 15 April 2025 (UTC)