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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from
http://www.wiredsafety.org/resources/biographies/parry/index2.html. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material Under the
GNU Free Documentation License. Because this permission was received prior to 1 November 2008, you may use the material under either that license or the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by
VRT volunteers, under ticket number
2006041110000559. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en wikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission. |
This revision appears to be nothing but a copyvio of this biography on WiredSafety.org. The content has been trimmed down, and a small amount of original content has been added, and it has been wikified, but it still remains a copyvio. I've reverted it for the time being. Jud e ( talk, contribs, email) 13:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! Sorry I hadn't responded sooner regarding the article, but I had gone to bed before I noticed that you had replied. For copyrighted content to be used on Wikipedia, permission needs to come from the owner of the copyright to release it under the terms of the GFDL, the text of which can be found here. When permission is granted, the person granting permission should be aware of the following points about the GFDL license:
The owner doesn't give up any rights: they're still free to publish the text elsewhere or to license the same text to other parties under any other license. However, the requirement to include the full text of the GFDL with any redistribution makes stand-alone commercial reuse of the item unlikely in practice.
Finally, the full text of the permission from the copyright holder should be emailed to permissions at wikimedia dot org. Jud e ( talk, contribs, email) 00:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
According to OTRS message 2006041110000559, we have permission to use the content. -- Zanimum 16:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
An account called Parryaftab recently edited this article on the 22nd of January, behaving as though its owner was the person described in the article. However, while she added to several paragraphs and her edits still exist on the article, all information added portrayed her in a positive light and moreover was worded with positive connotations, while existing information on the article was slightly edited to display her in a more positive light (such as suggesting that the list of her speaking engagements was incomplete but making no effort to fix it, and adding herself to the "Safety" category). As such, the NPOV of her edits is in question and could be considered "unduly self-serving". In addition, her edit (the only edit she has made on this page) adds no references or sources and thus seem to be unsourced - thus breaking verifiability and original research policies. Additionally, she presented certain information that are not even available on her biography on her own website - thus causing doubt about the account Parryaftab is actually Parry Aftab, and on top of that suggesting that the information is not factual. As I am inexperienced and somewhat unfamiliar with Wikipedia as well as the subject of the article, I am unsure how to handle this problem myself; as such, I am pointing it out to more experienced editors who likely know more than me. For reference, here are the Biographies of Living Persons guidelines in regards to edits by the subject of the article. 70.118.112.83 01:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
* It meets verifiability, NPOV, and no original research policies. * It is relevant to the person's notability; * It is not contentious; * It is not unduly self-serving; * There is no reasonable doubt that it was provided by the subject.
I agree, and for now I have added the "advert" tag as a warning to readers and encouragement to clean it up.-- Honestshrubber 04:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This link was just added to the article, but I feel it is better off not being in the article. However I'm copying it over to the talk page on the slight chance there is something useful in that thread?? Mathmo Talk 04:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
A citation tag was added to this article. This query seems to provide a lot of potential sources/references/citations: Do a Google search on "Parry Aftab" site:.gov -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 06:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This turns up her blogs. Even searching cursory parts of this article I haven't found anything to support even half the claims made. For example her involvement with "K-9 Angles". The link leads to a MindSpring placeholder page. Googling for this organization returns nothing other than Mrs. Parry Aftabs CSV and one hit to the SAME placeholder page. No previous versions were cached with Google. The only evidence to support that this organization has ever actually even existed is the fact the domain was registered on 26-Sep-2007. Is it time to prune this of peacock terms and bring it more inline with actual Wikipedia articles and not a CV?
JustHeath 04:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
If someone can give me some guidance on how to create a citation for a sentence such as this, I will give it a try. "She consults for and works with law enforcement agencies, worldwide, on cybercrime prevention, cyber-terrorism, law enforcement and security matters." The fact is that each instance of consulting is unique and no once source would serve the purpose of a citation. However, doing a search of government, law enforcement, and periodical databases will result in hundreds of hits, many of which are relevant. So how would one go about making such a citation? Awolinsky 15:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I apologize in advance for not being proficient in Wikipedia editing citation styles. As stated above, I'm not sure how to site material that mentioned a wide range of activities in a manner acceptable to Wikipedia. However, I did find links that I thought covered the territory. I added a citation in the Education section from Congressman Tim Bishop and in the Consulting section from the European Council that appear to deal with most if not all of the lacking citations in those sections.
I see that extensive editing was done to remove peacock terms and add other citations. As the one who created the original article I did so without knowing the prohibition of this kind of language and welcome the corrections. I would hope that between that editing and the additional citations the editors will see their way to removing some of the tags.
I have links from the MSNBC, Wired.com, Parade Magazine, The Montel Williams Show, the Early Show, USA Today, CNN, the FTC, Congressional Record, and many other sources that serve as testimony to the biography. I also have about 2 dozen citations from commercial databases such as Ebsco and Newsbank. Again, any help in making proper citations would be appreciated. Awolinsky 16:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I've re-inserted the POV tag, mainly because this article seems to speak very highly of the subject. Here are some statements that stand out:
She is The Privacy Lawyer columnist for Information Week Magazine and a frequent expert for media and news outlets, worldwide.
She has worked with FBI, U.S. Customs, Interpol, Scotland Yard, the Home Office, Tokyo Metropolitan Police and Japan's National Police, Hong Kong Police and the RCMP
In several other areas in the "Consulting and advisory activities" section, it is basically a listing of how she has "worked" with many organizations or been "featured" many times, but it doesn't actually say what was involved. It's really giving undue weight to list something just because she was quoted in it once or twice.
Her online discussions and writing are often published and quoted by legal journals in articles and judges in their decisions.
My point is that there are a lot of unsourced sentences that seem very promotional and use peacock terms to inflate their value. -- Wafulz 06:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This person doesn't seem notable at all. In fact, this whole entry seems to have been lifted whole from her own (poorly-designed) website. It reads like the finest variety of self-promotion. Chris Buckey 09:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Why was my nomination for deletion removed? This article is clearly a self-serving advertisement of an only vaguely notable individual. 128.255.201.127 05:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems non-notable to me, I'd support a deletion. It needs to be completely re-written if it stays, it's very much not a NPOV. Tombom23 08:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I too think she's non-notable. Throwing my support behind deletion. Lusy 10:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Non Notable individual and even if it stays the article needs to be rewritten to remove peacock terms. I support deletion 86.149.218.114 16:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
It's been over two weeks since protection, there hasn't been any vandalism for a while, and the threads on SA have drifted back into obscurity. I think we can unprotect this article now. Any objections? -- Wafulz 00:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
No objections. -- Sagan The Great 17:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I have decided to remove bulk of the uncited claims in order to tidy the page up. If anyone deems it necessary to reinsert them, I would suggest doing so only when sources can be cited properly.
TedStevens 22:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay, we see this page has numerous problems and has had them for a while. I'm going to create a subpage here for me to attempt to build an encyclopedic page. It will likely take me a long time, but when I am done, I'll let people know then ask for comment for a week or so before posting it. I'll start by copying the existing article so don't expect major changes immediately. Further, I intend to follow the policy from WP:SUB which includes:
Here is the subpage where I will be working: /revision of Parry Aftab.-- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
I have finished the majority of the major rewrite so I have placed on the main page so everyone can continue building it from there. I especially love the way I did the references so they will be easy to use and manage. I know I said I would give people a week to think about it, but I don't think anyone would see it if I did not post it on the main page. -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 23:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
It has been five years since any activity on this talk page. There was WP:UNDUE weight being given to non-notable events and information in press releases and other primary sources as well as overstating of minor personal criticisms by Katie Jones. I have cleared out most of the press releases and primary sources and balanced the article's content and tone. I could not find any articles where Aftab and her life/career were featured, however she has been quoted as an expert in numerous reliable, secondary sources. There are at least a dozen articles that are not cited in the current version of the article. I'd be happy to collaborate with anyone who wants to further develop the article in a fair and balanced manner, based on reliable secondary sources. Thanks for your help.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I've removed this text and source.
The source is a research paper by a graduate student. Per WP:BLP and WP:PRIMARY such a self published, primary source containing the opinion of one person, is not sufficient for such a strong claim. If a reliable secondary source in the main stream media or a book published by a reputable publishing house, is available, then we can add this content back into the article.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
It appears to be self promotion:
CBS News describes her as:
Firstly, per WP:LEAD, the lead paragraph(s) are to briefly summarize content already in the article. It is a brief overview so details about isolated events not mentioned in the body of the article are inappropriate. Other objections include:
-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at the Biography of Living Persons noticeboard about sourcing for this article. Please feel free to join the discussion here. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Parry Aftab/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This article needs some serious editing to bring it up to an acceptable standard. The section entitled 'Consulting and advisory activities' is entirely uncited, as is the 'Selected honours' section and all but one of the bullet points in 'Selected online activites' section. This article still reads very much like an advertisement, especially where it reads "Her areas of legal expertise are Children Online, Worldwide Cybercrime Protection and Prevention, Privacy, Data Collection and Security, Workplace Risk Management and Security, Consumer Protection, Advertising and the Internet, E-Commerce, Cyberstalking and Harassment, Child Exploitation and Child Pornography. She also works with members of the Internet industry to help build safer products and services." I was going to nominate this article for deletion, but perhaps it would be best to give people time to bring the standard up before that happens. TedStevens 21:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 21:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 02:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:54, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
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 Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that an image or photograph be
included in this article to
improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific
media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from
http://www.wiredsafety.org/resources/biographies/parry/index2.html. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material Under the
GNU Free Documentation License. Because this permission was received prior to 1 November 2008, you may use the material under either that license or the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported license. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by
VRT volunteers, under ticket number
2006041110000559. This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-en wikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission. |
This revision appears to be nothing but a copyvio of this biography on WiredSafety.org. The content has been trimmed down, and a small amount of original content has been added, and it has been wikified, but it still remains a copyvio. I've reverted it for the time being. Jud e ( talk, contribs, email) 13:36, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
Hi there! Sorry I hadn't responded sooner regarding the article, but I had gone to bed before I noticed that you had replied. For copyrighted content to be used on Wikipedia, permission needs to come from the owner of the copyright to release it under the terms of the GFDL, the text of which can be found here. When permission is granted, the person granting permission should be aware of the following points about the GFDL license:
The owner doesn't give up any rights: they're still free to publish the text elsewhere or to license the same text to other parties under any other license. However, the requirement to include the full text of the GFDL with any redistribution makes stand-alone commercial reuse of the item unlikely in practice.
Finally, the full text of the permission from the copyright holder should be emailed to permissions at wikimedia dot org. Jud e ( talk, contribs, email) 00:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
According to OTRS message 2006041110000559, we have permission to use the content. -- Zanimum 16:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
An account called Parryaftab recently edited this article on the 22nd of January, behaving as though its owner was the person described in the article. However, while she added to several paragraphs and her edits still exist on the article, all information added portrayed her in a positive light and moreover was worded with positive connotations, while existing information on the article was slightly edited to display her in a more positive light (such as suggesting that the list of her speaking engagements was incomplete but making no effort to fix it, and adding herself to the "Safety" category). As such, the NPOV of her edits is in question and could be considered "unduly self-serving". In addition, her edit (the only edit she has made on this page) adds no references or sources and thus seem to be unsourced - thus breaking verifiability and original research policies. Additionally, she presented certain information that are not even available on her biography on her own website - thus causing doubt about the account Parryaftab is actually Parry Aftab, and on top of that suggesting that the information is not factual. As I am inexperienced and somewhat unfamiliar with Wikipedia as well as the subject of the article, I am unsure how to handle this problem myself; as such, I am pointing it out to more experienced editors who likely know more than me. For reference, here are the Biographies of Living Persons guidelines in regards to edits by the subject of the article. 70.118.112.83 01:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
* It meets verifiability, NPOV, and no original research policies. * It is relevant to the person's notability; * It is not contentious; * It is not unduly self-serving; * There is no reasonable doubt that it was provided by the subject.
I agree, and for now I have added the "advert" tag as a warning to readers and encouragement to clean it up.-- Honestshrubber 04:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This link was just added to the article, but I feel it is better off not being in the article. However I'm copying it over to the talk page on the slight chance there is something useful in that thread?? Mathmo Talk 04:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
A citation tag was added to this article. This query seems to provide a lot of potential sources/references/citations: Do a Google search on "Parry Aftab" site:.gov -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 06:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This turns up her blogs. Even searching cursory parts of this article I haven't found anything to support even half the claims made. For example her involvement with "K-9 Angles". The link leads to a MindSpring placeholder page. Googling for this organization returns nothing other than Mrs. Parry Aftabs CSV and one hit to the SAME placeholder page. No previous versions were cached with Google. The only evidence to support that this organization has ever actually even existed is the fact the domain was registered on 26-Sep-2007. Is it time to prune this of peacock terms and bring it more inline with actual Wikipedia articles and not a CV?
JustHeath 04:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
If someone can give me some guidance on how to create a citation for a sentence such as this, I will give it a try. "She consults for and works with law enforcement agencies, worldwide, on cybercrime prevention, cyber-terrorism, law enforcement and security matters." The fact is that each instance of consulting is unique and no once source would serve the purpose of a citation. However, doing a search of government, law enforcement, and periodical databases will result in hundreds of hits, many of which are relevant. So how would one go about making such a citation? Awolinsky 15:49, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I apologize in advance for not being proficient in Wikipedia editing citation styles. As stated above, I'm not sure how to site material that mentioned a wide range of activities in a manner acceptable to Wikipedia. However, I did find links that I thought covered the territory. I added a citation in the Education section from Congressman Tim Bishop and in the Consulting section from the European Council that appear to deal with most if not all of the lacking citations in those sections.
I see that extensive editing was done to remove peacock terms and add other citations. As the one who created the original article I did so without knowing the prohibition of this kind of language and welcome the corrections. I would hope that between that editing and the additional citations the editors will see their way to removing some of the tags.
I have links from the MSNBC, Wired.com, Parade Magazine, The Montel Williams Show, the Early Show, USA Today, CNN, the FTC, Congressional Record, and many other sources that serve as testimony to the biography. I also have about 2 dozen citations from commercial databases such as Ebsco and Newsbank. Again, any help in making proper citations would be appreciated. Awolinsky 16:02, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
I've re-inserted the POV tag, mainly because this article seems to speak very highly of the subject. Here are some statements that stand out:
She is The Privacy Lawyer columnist for Information Week Magazine and a frequent expert for media and news outlets, worldwide.
She has worked with FBI, U.S. Customs, Interpol, Scotland Yard, the Home Office, Tokyo Metropolitan Police and Japan's National Police, Hong Kong Police and the RCMP
In several other areas in the "Consulting and advisory activities" section, it is basically a listing of how she has "worked" with many organizations or been "featured" many times, but it doesn't actually say what was involved. It's really giving undue weight to list something just because she was quoted in it once or twice.
Her online discussions and writing are often published and quoted by legal journals in articles and judges in their decisions.
My point is that there are a lot of unsourced sentences that seem very promotional and use peacock terms to inflate their value. -- Wafulz 06:04, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
This person doesn't seem notable at all. In fact, this whole entry seems to have been lifted whole from her own (poorly-designed) website. It reads like the finest variety of self-promotion. Chris Buckey 09:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Why was my nomination for deletion removed? This article is clearly a self-serving advertisement of an only vaguely notable individual. 128.255.201.127 05:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems non-notable to me, I'd support a deletion. It needs to be completely re-written if it stays, it's very much not a NPOV. Tombom23 08:40, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
I too think she's non-notable. Throwing my support behind deletion. Lusy 10:05, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Non Notable individual and even if it stays the article needs to be rewritten to remove peacock terms. I support deletion 86.149.218.114 16:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
It's been over two weeks since protection, there hasn't been any vandalism for a while, and the threads on SA have drifted back into obscurity. I think we can unprotect this article now. Any objections? -- Wafulz 00:05, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
No objections. -- Sagan The Great 17:52, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I have decided to remove bulk of the uncited claims in order to tidy the page up. If anyone deems it necessary to reinsert them, I would suggest doing so only when sources can be cited properly.
TedStevens 22:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Okay, we see this page has numerous problems and has had them for a while. I'm going to create a subpage here for me to attempt to build an encyclopedic page. It will likely take me a long time, but when I am done, I'll let people know then ask for comment for a week or so before posting it. I'll start by copying the existing article so don't expect major changes immediately. Further, I intend to follow the policy from WP:SUB which includes:
Here is the subpage where I will be working: /revision of Parry Aftab.-- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling
I have finished the majority of the major rewrite so I have placed on the main page so everyone can continue building it from there. I especially love the way I did the references so they will be easy to use and manage. I know I said I would give people a week to think about it, but I don't think anyone would see it if I did not post it on the main page. -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 23:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
It has been five years since any activity on this talk page. There was WP:UNDUE weight being given to non-notable events and information in press releases and other primary sources as well as overstating of minor personal criticisms by Katie Jones. I have cleared out most of the press releases and primary sources and balanced the article's content and tone. I could not find any articles where Aftab and her life/career were featured, however she has been quoted as an expert in numerous reliable, secondary sources. There are at least a dozen articles that are not cited in the current version of the article. I'd be happy to collaborate with anyone who wants to further develop the article in a fair and balanced manner, based on reliable secondary sources. Thanks for your help.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 21:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
I've removed this text and source.
The source is a research paper by a graduate student. Per WP:BLP and WP:PRIMARY such a self published, primary source containing the opinion of one person, is not sufficient for such a strong claim. If a reliable secondary source in the main stream media or a book published by a reputable publishing house, is available, then we can add this content back into the article.-- — Keithbob • Talk • 17:15, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
It appears to be self promotion:
CBS News describes her as:
Firstly, per WP:LEAD, the lead paragraph(s) are to briefly summarize content already in the article. It is a brief overview so details about isolated events not mentioned in the body of the article are inappropriate. Other objections include:
-- — Keithbob • Talk • 16:02, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at the Biography of Living Persons noticeboard about sourcing for this article. Please feel free to join the discussion here. -- — Keithbob • Talk • 18:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Parry Aftab/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
This article needs some serious editing to bring it up to an acceptable standard. The section entitled 'Consulting and advisory activities' is entirely uncited, as is the 'Selected honours' section and all but one of the bullet points in 'Selected online activites' section. This article still reads very much like an advertisement, especially where it reads "Her areas of legal expertise are Children Online, Worldwide Cybercrime Protection and Prevention, Privacy, Data Collection and Security, Workplace Risk Management and Security, Consumer Protection, Advertising and the Internet, E-Commerce, Cyberstalking and Harassment, Child Exploitation and Child Pornography. She also works with members of the Internet industry to help build safer products and services." I was going to nominate this article for deletion, but perhaps it would be best to give people time to bring the standard up before that happens. TedStevens 21:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC) |
Last edited at 21:14, 11 March 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 02:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:54, 9 June 2019 (UTC)