Talk:Parry Aftab

message: According to OTRS message 2006041110000559, we have permission to use the content.  --  Zanimum 16:35, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Permission 

message: 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)
replies: text: Forums are not reliable sources. However, it does provide the source of the recent vandalism. --Wafulz 04:56, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wafulz, I just don't understand the joy people must get from being mean to Parry in the way they vandalize this page. Why even waste their time? And Parry likely is too busy watching their backs to notice what they are doing.  --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 05:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because she's fat? But seriously, every claim on this page needs to have its own citation using the "ref" format. As it stands right now this page is terrible.--Liface 06:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Careful, don't feed the trolls. --Wafulz 05:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, I'd say that the article is biased in favor of her. It still reads as though it's simply been lifted off of a website promoting her and her activities. Agnapostate (talk) 18:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something awful forums 

message: 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)
replies: text: There you go.  That's why I reverted the wholesale removal of your work.  We all have to respect each other; the wholesale cuts based on someone's perceived time limitation had to be reversed. Great work, Awolinsky, keep it up! --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 18:51, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Potential sources of references/citations

message: 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)
replies: text: Then nominate it for deletion.  --ElKevbo 12:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

text: If you support deletion then nominate the article for deletion.  Talking about it here doesn't do you any good.  --ElKevbo 16:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FYI, I will vigorously oppose deletion.  The page may not be the best written in the world, but that is not grounds for deletion in and of itself.  It just needs improvement, the whole purpose of Wikipedia.  The individual is not notable to people who want to ignore the notability of the person because they don't like what the person says and they don't want others to hear the message.  Factually, she satisfies the definition of notability.  Even nobility, in my POV. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 16:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whether or not people want this to be deleted doesn't matter. The fact is, there are dozens of reliable secondary sources about her- hell, I managed to find about ten different ones for the "katie.com" section without even trying (though I didn't use them all). The article needs a rewrite pretty badly, but this doesn't mean that it will be deleted. --Wafulz 17:24, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nominating articles for deletion seems a lot easier than nominating them to be rewritten :( Loriel 21:28, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Have a read through this. Cleaning up articles is significantly preferred to deleting them. This was a pretty lousy article at one point too you know. --Wafulz 21:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable? 

message: 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)
replies: text: The article was unprotected a few days ago.  --ElKevbo 17:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Unprotection

message: 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:
# [Do not] [w]rit[e] drafts of major article revisions, e.g., Example Article/Temp in the main namespace, as you can get there accidentally using special:randompage — write these in the talk namespace, e.g. Talk:Example Article/Temp. See Wikipedia:Workpages for detail. Also, avoid incoming and outward links regarding such "Talk:.../Temp" page that might create the impression this is an encyclopedia page before it is, e.g.:
#* surround "category" links by "nowiki" tags, so that the temp page doesn't show up in a non-project category as if it were an article, example: [[Category:Incredibly smart people]]. The "nowiki" tags should be removed only when the "temp" content is moved to its place in article namespace. (This is an outward link example.) Another solution: put a colon before word "Category", for example, write :Category:Shamanism instead of Category:Shamanism. In this case, it will be still linkable, but it will not make the subpage appear on category pages.
#* don't create navigational templates that make it appear as if this temp page is part of a series of encyclopedia articles, for example, don't do this: "... | John I of Doeland | John II of Doeland | John III of Doeland | ...". (this is an incoming link example).
#* Draft pages mistakenly created in the main namespace should be moved as appropriate, or deleted if they are inactive and redundant to the main article.
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)
thread_title:  Attempting major revision 

message: 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:
*She created WiredTrust,https://www.wiredtrust.com/whoweare/ 
**self published source, non notable see WP:SELFPUB
*a digital best practices consulting firm, and founded WiredSafety https://www.wiredsafety.org/about/ 
** self published source, non notable see WP:SELFPUB
*and the StopCyberbullying Coalition.http://kidsafeonline.net/kidsafe_blog/?p=45 
** A personal blog is not a reliable source per WP:RS
*She is a public speakerhttp://council.nyc.gov/html/pr/cyberrelease.shtmlhttp://www.touchbaseonline.ca/?p=3307
**see WP:OR. We draw conclusions from a collection of sources. It there is a reliable source that says she is a noted public speaker we can add that to the article. 
*and called upon to testify before governmental bodies on issues ranging from online gamblinghttp://judiciary.house.gov/_cache/files/d8337f2b-3fc8-466f-8f78-8827dca85e14/aftab-testimony.pdfhttp://archives.financialservices.house.gov/media/file/hearings/111/aftab.pdfhttp://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/gambling-freedom-federalism/ to cybersafetyhttp://democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/sites/democrats.edworkforce.house.gov/files/documents/111/pdf/testimony/20100624ParryAftabTestimony.pdf and privacy.https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_events/Protecting%20Kids%26%23039%3B%20Privacy%20Online%20Reviewing%20the%20COPPA%20Rule/Bios_2010COPPARoundtable.pdf 
**These are all primary sources, see WP:PRIMARY. While some primary sources are permitted article cannot be based on these kind of low quality sourcing. I'd also caution again about making broad statements and conclusions based on a variety of sources per WP:OR. Lastly, Just because something is mentioned in a primary source does not make it notable. I'd prefer to see a secondary source that says Aftab has given testimony to government bodies X, Y, Z.  That would be something worth including in the article. Do we have a source like that?
*She is a frequent on-air expert for the media. 
**Copyright infringement. The source says "she is a regular on-air expert for the media"  
*Aftab designed the Internet safety program for the Girl Scouts of the USA,http://www.girlscoutguide.com/tag/parry-aftab/ 
**An articvle in the Girl Scouts Guide does not make something notable. Please read WP:RS
*the digital abuse and legal sections of MTV's A Thin Line initiative http://www.athinline.org/about 
**Not in cited source
* and Liz Claiborne's Love is Not Abuse digital project. (see MTV citation). 
** Not in cited source-- — Keithbob • Talk •  16:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Explanation for removed content

message: 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)
replies: text: The upshot of the discussion at BLPN is that this Bloomberg bio is not reliable and shouldn't be used in the article.-- — Keithbob • Talk •  19:18, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Discussion at BLPN

message: Substituted at 02:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion