This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vivek Kundra article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
There's been a small edit war about the inclusion of information detailing the fraud conducted by an official in Kundra's office. A consensus was reached here that the fact that the official was arrested should be included. Now a new source states what the actual details of the fraud are, it seems sensible to include this. I didn't add the details myself but I have now replaced them twice, most recently I reduced the details somewhat to only be: "The fraud involved more than $500,000 in bribes and kickbacks as part of a long-running contracting scam. [1]"
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
If you disagree with this being included please state why. WP:UNDUE was cited as a reason to remove it, this seems to be concerned with the representation of viewpoints rather than facts however. Smartse ( talk) 15:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
<ref>{{cite news|title=Ex-security head in D.C.'s Chief Technology Office pleads guilty in bribe case|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/18/AR2009121804043.html|date=Saturday, December 19, 2009 |publisher=[[Washington Post ]]|accessdate=2009-12-19}}</ref> Smartse ( talk) 18:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You insist on adding details about Acar that do not belong in this biography. These details are not specifically relevant to Mr. Kundra, and by adding them they are not in the spirit of WP:WEIGHT, WP:NPOV or WP:HARM -- Mary Gracee ( talk) 19:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The leave of absence paragraph was changed, again. On January 2 and 3 the source was changed to an article that is primarily about Kundra winning an award. Also the phrase "quickly returning to work after being cleared" was added. We already say the leave was 5 days, the reader can decide if that is "quick." Also we say Kundra was not a suspect, to say he was "cleared" implies otherwise. The changes should be reverted. Truprint ( talk) 08:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I have added in a sub-section on cloud computing under the Federal CIO. This is a substantive operational shift that Kundra has put into place for the Federal government. Surprising that this section did not mention this or any of the recent initiatives that have certainly caught the eye of the IT community. -- OmbudsTech ( talk) 20:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
The recognition as Chief of the Year appears to have been mentioned twice. Once in professional recognition and again in the Federal CIO. Since the second reference is redundant I have removed it from the Federal CIO section. -- OmbudsTech ( talk) 22:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
The recent edits under the Career Section regarding Aneesh Chopra and USINPAC are irrelevant and not notable. Thus, I am reverting the changes. CaptainAB ( talk) 19:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Google's gmail system being hacked is not particularly relevent here, as Google is not under federal government tenure, and the control of Vivek over the company is extremely limited. Clovis Sangrail ( talk) 01:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Seems to us that wrt GOOG hack, any issue discussed by US Sec of State vis a vis hacking allegedly by or with the knowledge of a foreign power, i.e., China is a national security issue. One of the goals of Kundra was supposedly setting policies relating to cybersecurity, so we cannot have it both ways. Either put up on the results or remove the following "Kundra has made it a priority to focus on the following areas:...(3) cyber-security," —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.182.27.165 ( talk) 19:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Adding internal link to Howard Schmidt's page in Wikipedia. I think having extensive quotations from Schmidt is UNDUE in Kundra's page. -- HealthMind ( talk) 23:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- MaryGD ( talk) 13:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
(outdent) I removed the quote which seems to imply that Mr. Schmidt will watch over Mr. Kundra's activities, whereas, from the article, it appears that the two will be working together as a team of sorts. Please explain why the quote is necessary before reinserting. -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 23:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
189.164.88.207
189.164.86.232
189.164.154.72
189.164.97.160
189.182.25.226
189.182.30.51
189.164.84.85
189.182.24.12
189.164.93.129
189.164.163.139
-- MaryGD ( talk) 22:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Your collective behavior in repeatedly refusing to allow the specific Howard Schmidt quotation, not to mention the Kundra quotation, which directly relate to the purportedly objective notes on Mr Kundra's Cybersecurity policies, would be laughable if it were not so creepy.
An odd peripheral circumstance is that many of the pro-Kundra comments can be traced to locations coincidentally, we are sure, that lie in proximity to Kundra's friends and inlaws' residential addresses, but we digress.
The narcissistic and self congratulatory demeanor of the various 'editors' of this page, borders on one or more symptoms of schizophrenia and similar anti-social disorders under DSM-5. One has to wonder how many of these people even has a real life much less a day job. Are they all just hoping for a call from the subject of the page, with an 'ata boy or 'ata girl? Or are they really that ignorant of their supposed role in maintaining objectivity?
The inane suggestion that quotes cannot be included until justified by the Posse of the Clueless, and that unless there is the approval of some unspecified number of the inmates at this asylum, speaks for itself.
If one reads through the history of this web page, not really recommending that one wastes one's time doing so, it becomes clear how biased this page is, as a pep rally for the subject of the page, and as a means to further spin the myth that somehow Mr Kundra has a clue as to what he is doing.
We will continue to watch this farce in progress, but will no longer, just as the few people that tried in the past have done, waste any more time playing the online game that calls itself an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.182.24.98 ( talk) 14:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
(ec)A quick note for 189.164.86.232. Even though your IP has changed, you're in violation of 3RR (4 reverts in a 24 hour period). You should make your case on the talk page before reverting again. Regards. -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 22:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
An anon added:
Even if this reference isn't a blog, it should be written as a referenced sentence, not as an external pseudo-link. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Vivek Kundra wasn't the DC CTO who originally created the DC Data Catalog. That was Suzanne Peck, as I documented in the 2006 InfoWorld article ( http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/open-government-meets-it-161) I referenced along with the change I made.
The change left a dangling reference called SFData that I can't see how to fix.
Jonudell ( talk) 10:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Vivek Kundra. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vivek Kundra article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
There's been a small edit war about the inclusion of information detailing the fraud conducted by an official in Kundra's office. A consensus was reached here that the fact that the official was arrested should be included. Now a new source states what the actual details of the fraud are, it seems sensible to include this. I didn't add the details myself but I have now replaced them twice, most recently I reduced the details somewhat to only be: "The fraud involved more than $500,000 in bribes and kickbacks as part of a long-running contracting scam. [1]"
{{
cite news}}
: Check date values in: |date=
(
help)
If you disagree with this being included please state why. WP:UNDUE was cited as a reason to remove it, this seems to be concerned with the representation of viewpoints rather than facts however. Smartse ( talk) 15:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
<ref>{{cite news|title=Ex-security head in D.C.'s Chief Technology Office pleads guilty in bribe case|url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/18/AR2009121804043.html|date=Saturday, December 19, 2009 |publisher=[[Washington Post ]]|accessdate=2009-12-19}}</ref> Smartse ( talk) 18:37, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You insist on adding details about Acar that do not belong in this biography. These details are not specifically relevant to Mr. Kundra, and by adding them they are not in the spirit of WP:WEIGHT, WP:NPOV or WP:HARM -- Mary Gracee ( talk) 19:04, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
The leave of absence paragraph was changed, again. On January 2 and 3 the source was changed to an article that is primarily about Kundra winning an award. Also the phrase "quickly returning to work after being cleared" was added. We already say the leave was 5 days, the reader can decide if that is "quick." Also we say Kundra was not a suspect, to say he was "cleared" implies otherwise. The changes should be reverted. Truprint ( talk) 08:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
I have added in a sub-section on cloud computing under the Federal CIO. This is a substantive operational shift that Kundra has put into place for the Federal government. Surprising that this section did not mention this or any of the recent initiatives that have certainly caught the eye of the IT community. -- OmbudsTech ( talk) 20:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
The recognition as Chief of the Year appears to have been mentioned twice. Once in professional recognition and again in the Federal CIO. Since the second reference is redundant I have removed it from the Federal CIO section. -- OmbudsTech ( talk) 22:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
The recent edits under the Career Section regarding Aneesh Chopra and USINPAC are irrelevant and not notable. Thus, I am reverting the changes. CaptainAB ( talk) 19:58, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Google's gmail system being hacked is not particularly relevent here, as Google is not under federal government tenure, and the control of Vivek over the company is extremely limited. Clovis Sangrail ( talk) 01:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Seems to us that wrt GOOG hack, any issue discussed by US Sec of State vis a vis hacking allegedly by or with the knowledge of a foreign power, i.e., China is a national security issue. One of the goals of Kundra was supposedly setting policies relating to cybersecurity, so we cannot have it both ways. Either put up on the results or remove the following "Kundra has made it a priority to focus on the following areas:...(3) cyber-security," —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.182.27.165 ( talk) 19:52, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Adding internal link to Howard Schmidt's page in Wikipedia. I think having extensive quotations from Schmidt is UNDUE in Kundra's page. -- HealthMind ( talk) 23:20, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
- MaryGD ( talk) 13:54, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
(outdent) I removed the quote which seems to imply that Mr. Schmidt will watch over Mr. Kundra's activities, whereas, from the article, it appears that the two will be working together as a team of sorts. Please explain why the quote is necessary before reinserting. -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 23:13, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
189.164.88.207
189.164.86.232
189.164.154.72
189.164.97.160
189.182.25.226
189.182.30.51
189.164.84.85
189.182.24.12
189.164.93.129
189.164.163.139
-- MaryGD ( talk) 22:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Your collective behavior in repeatedly refusing to allow the specific Howard Schmidt quotation, not to mention the Kundra quotation, which directly relate to the purportedly objective notes on Mr Kundra's Cybersecurity policies, would be laughable if it were not so creepy.
An odd peripheral circumstance is that many of the pro-Kundra comments can be traced to locations coincidentally, we are sure, that lie in proximity to Kundra's friends and inlaws' residential addresses, but we digress.
The narcissistic and self congratulatory demeanor of the various 'editors' of this page, borders on one or more symptoms of schizophrenia and similar anti-social disorders under DSM-5. One has to wonder how many of these people even has a real life much less a day job. Are they all just hoping for a call from the subject of the page, with an 'ata boy or 'ata girl? Or are they really that ignorant of their supposed role in maintaining objectivity?
The inane suggestion that quotes cannot be included until justified by the Posse of the Clueless, and that unless there is the approval of some unspecified number of the inmates at this asylum, speaks for itself.
If one reads through the history of this web page, not really recommending that one wastes one's time doing so, it becomes clear how biased this page is, as a pep rally for the subject of the page, and as a means to further spin the myth that somehow Mr Kundra has a clue as to what he is doing.
We will continue to watch this farce in progress, but will no longer, just as the few people that tried in the past have done, waste any more time playing the online game that calls itself an encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.182.24.98 ( talk) 14:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
(ec)A quick note for 189.164.86.232. Even though your IP has changed, you're in violation of 3RR (4 reverts in a 24 hour period). You should make your case on the talk page before reverting again. Regards. -- RegentsPark ( sticks and stones) 22:48, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
An anon added:
Even if this reference isn't a blog, it should be written as a referenced sentence, not as an external pseudo-link. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 03:57, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
Vivek Kundra wasn't the DC CTO who originally created the DC Data Catalog. That was Suzanne Peck, as I documented in the 2006 InfoWorld article ( http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/open-government-meets-it-161) I referenced along with the change I made.
The change left a dangling reference called SFData that I can't see how to fix.
Jonudell ( talk) 10:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Vivek Kundra. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 08:57, 24 February 2016 (UTC)