Talk:Ankit Fadia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
|||
|
[edit] What is the need for a "Claims" section?
If these are merely claims made by the individual, Ankit Fadia and unsubstantiated by any other concerned party, why is there a need for a list of such claims? It serves no purpose and it appears that Wikipedia is in some way endorsing these baseless claims. Shouldn't this section be deleted altogether? After all, wikipedia is supposed to contain verified facts and not baseless claims. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.193.97 (talk) 21:18, August 26, 2007 (UTC)
- These claims are what helped in get media coverage and therefore, notability. utcursch | talk 11:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
That is true, and that should be mentioned in a way that makes it clear that these claims do not have a factual basis. The way these claims are presented seems to lend credence to them. Either this be mentioned, or the claims should be deleted altogether. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.103.192.73 (talk) 17:11, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Removed "Ankit Fadia has also sponsored the "Ankit Fadia Information Security Award", which is given annually by The Singapore Management University, to an outstanding student in the Information Security and Trust Course under the Bachelor of Science (Information System Management) degree". This is false and the reference given "http://www.ewh.ieee.org/sb/bombay/amrutvahini/events/ankit_seminar_files/Ankit_Information.htm" contains no such statement —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.3.20.9 (talk) 04:20, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Heads up, fellow editors
Bunch of things need to change here.
- There is no way we're going to have a WP:BLP article where the first section is called "Claims" and the last section is called "The Unethical Side"
- We don't need to capture every single reference; we only need the best references to the most notable information
- Wikipedia is not a crystal ball; Fadia's future goals are not a topic for an encyclopedia.
- We cannot cite blogs, websites, and WP:SPS for contested information in a BLP.
I'd love to see articles like this deleted; Fadia's true notability in the security field, or, for that matter, the Internet field, is at present nil. But that's a losing argument and a waste of time in the fact of a zillion little trade press and magazine cites. So instead, let's just pare this article down to the bare facts, and stop aggrandizing the subject with a back-and-forth controversy played on a Wikipedia article.
Edits to come, comments welcome.
--- tqbf 19:10, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pakistani crackers acted like tantrum throwing kids
The Pakistani crackers mentioned defaced random sites with posts implying their annoyance with Ankit Fadia. Of course the posts were full of bluster on the face of it and in actuality couldn't, with proof, reverse or dismiss any of Ankit Fadia's achievements. Their behavior was ample exhibition of the profile of a chest beating, ape-like hooligan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.178.44.75 (talk) 04:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)