Talk:Parental controls

message: in one paragraph, this is unreadable.--80.227.100.62 06:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bah... 

message: I think this should be merged with Content-control Software.  Since it contains basically no new information, perhaps delete and redirect is the right way to do that merger. Novalis 03:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed merger 

message: Most of the technology aspects of article was contributed by Tony Ganino author of (c) 2002 Parental Filter at ecommsec.com, "I included more about the technology aspects of web filtering but they have since been deleted" parental control software can be fustrating for users and can attract great wrath from young people with imature attitudes like "the earth must be destroyed because I can't login to messenger" but the technology is valuable for providing young people an introduction to the research possibilities of the Internet.
Nateland 00:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parental Filter from ecommsec.com 

message: Since Microsoft only recently copied Apple and included a slim version of parental controls, it'd make more sense to put in a screenshot from 10.5 Leopard when it comes out. That is all. -DMCer 10:05, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why a Vista screenshot? 

message: It does not say that "parental control" IS just and only a form of censorship. KSM-2501ZX, IP address:= 200.155.188.4 (talk) 11:26, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well now it has one, though it seems to be the only criticism is that it doesn't work.. Which is valid. I particularly like the idea of parents sitting down and discussing the risks with their kids.. Only, it'd be the same as the drugs discussion. You can't discuss the risks because they don't exist.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.70.113 (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

text: Well, put it back.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.182.149.81 (talk) 06:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article lacks a criticism section 

message: DVD players use parental controls, and there are 8 levels. Add this to the article please. 108.65.83.136 (talk) 00:11, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  For DVD players 

message: Where were these stats found? Is this a direct quote or a paraphrase?
Ggenevieve (talk) 06:08, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source? 

message: Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
1. This writing was written out in a very neutral way. There was no topic or statement made in favor of one opinion more than another. It discussed the reasons of why these controls are of good use and the criticism that could be made against this topic. 
Are there viewpoints that are over-represented, or under-represented?
2. After reading this article I feel as though the one thing under-represented is the criticism section. I believe there are more articles that can be found that may suggest more facts as to why this may hinder a child's learning experience. As well as how the communication may differ in a family that uses parental control over one that does not. 
Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
3. Everything was completely relevant to the topic of Parental Controls. The writing went as far as listing out the different devices that parental controls can be found on. As well as methods people use to bypass these controls altogether.Kbarbes27 (talk) 05:21, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Critque Questons Answered  

message: I added new information in the sub-line about how parents use mobile devices to monitor their children and added a new citation with it. I had also fixed the sentence structure of before the passage that I added. glake98 (glake98) 11:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Information about Monitoring and New Citation 

message: Removed unrelated study about self-control from the Criticism section. See discussion on the user's page Aardila (talk) 11:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism section 

message: I added a bypass method and tried to replace the links with secure ones and I got the following warning. I think this article completely vanished. It is total bullshit.
  aa.bb.cc.proxy.xx.yy.zz - a local proxy appended to the domain-name of the original publisher:
  'https://www.oxfordartonline.com.proxy.lib.duke.edu/<path>' should be replaced by 'http://www.oxfordartonline.com/<path>'
  aa-bb-cc-dd.xx.yy.oclc.org - oclc.org proxy, where the dots in the original domainname are replaced with a dash:
  'httpss://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ucsf.idm.oclc.org/<path>' should be replaced by 'www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/<path>'
The article is still there but the links you tried to appear to have problems. A little bit like AMP links, I'm guessing. The first one has "proxy" in it, and the second one, indeed, seemingly unnecessarily modified dots with dashes and also has a typo in "httpss".  Nakonana (talk) 18:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  WTF guys are you aware what you are up to 

message: The question of violation of the privacy rights of the child are being raised by some.
Possible sources:
https://sites.unicef.org/csr/files/UNICEF_Childrens_Online_Privacy_and_Freedom_of_Expression(1).pdf
Convention on the Rights of the Child 
by the United Nations. General comment No. 25 (2021) on children’s rights in relation to the digital environment.  https://www.ohchr.org/en/documents/general-comments-and-recommendations/general-comment-no-25-2021-childrens-rights-relation
Shmueli, Benjamin and Blecher-Prigat, Ayelet, Privacy for Children (January 24, 2011). Columbia Human Rights Law Review, Vol. 42, pp. 759-95, 2011, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1746540 Nakonana (talk) 18:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion of criticism section