Talk:Ankit Fadia

message: The truth is that Ankit Fadia is a great ethical hacker who is being defamed by people jealous of him who are spreading rumours against him. Despite all these, he stands today as the greatest ethical hacker of India. I'm really a great fan of this man. All authentic news sources of India such as the Times of India, the Hindustan Times, the Hindu, NDTV etc. recognize his achievements. At the age of 14, he started a website to teach people hacking and a year later, he wrote a book. He has taken part in many investigations of cybercrime and he's a bran ambassador of Digital India. He's promoting Digital literacy in India and also gives his own courses on Digital India. Hate him or love him, he's a great man and you must recognize his achievements.
: I call BS. If you have any reliable source please enlist them. // Eatcha (talk) 14:17, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: The Reality of Ankit Fadia

message: The way the current page reads, it seems that Wikipedia should be interviewing every homeless person at the Pacific Garden Mission and giving them a stub here. Ankit Fadia is akin to Paris Hilton famous only for being famous, Ankit Fadia is not a hacker, not a security professional, but he excels with the scam of offering tricks gleaned from Google and re-purposing this as a certificate to impoverished Indians with the expectation of making $80K U.S.D. 
Previous edits of this article point to a number of mainstream news publications pointing out that Ankit Fadia has made extraordinary claims, and offered no cites to back these claims up. Ankit Fadia claimed to Wendy McAuliffe at ZDNet UK, Fadia's Hacking Truths website was judged "second best hacking site" by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, though no ranked list of "hacking sites" has been published by the FBI.
Attendees of the DEF_CON 20 hacker convention rated Ankit Fadia the charlatan of the year, there is a large posting on Quora about Ankit Fadia under Expertise: What are examples of experts who, in the end are not really experts? which has some 1400 votes. http://www.quora.com/Expertise/What-are-examples-of-experts-who-in-the-end-are-not-really-experts that Ankit Fadia is not an expert in anything except giving poor security advice to clueless writers in his home country. Please also research this link when considering this deletion request.
 
http://securityerrata.org/errata/charlatan/ankit_fadia/
While I may have borked the submission to delete this article, I hope someone else carries the torch and corrects my mistake, I thank you for your time.
Mongo Feels Better (talk) 05:58, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This article cannot be deleted for the same reason as the Wikipedia article on Paris Hilton cannot be deleted. From most reputable sources, it appears that hes' a fraud, but this fact must be stated in the article. I'll see what I can do about it, your help would be appreciated. Thanks!
PratikMallya ☎ 22:10, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Delete this article about Ankit Fadia

message: Are we going to be making a Wikipedia page for every fraudster consultant under the sun? This page should be submitted for deletion. Wikipedia is NOT your personal advertising media and is neither made to raise oneself ego or credibility.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.246.3.2 (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Most sources are self-published. The article isn't NPOV. However, the article cannot be deleted since it is notable. Harsh (talk)  08:50, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: 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)
replies: text: He would have turned 16 during 2001 but if the book was published before his birthday he would still have been 15 at the time. January (talk) 10:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the need for a "Claims" section? 

message: Some sources say he was 14, while some say he was 15. Both these figures seem to be in error since he was born in 1985, and the book was published in 2001.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.57.147.104 (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: He would have turned 16 during 2001 but if the book was published before his birthday he would still have been 15 at the time. January (talk) 10:45, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: How old was he really when he published his first book?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Heads up, fellow editors 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Pakistani crackers acted like tantrum throwing kids 

message: How freakishly-odd personnel domain for the so-called "India's ultimate kickass hacker" !!!
"Fadia has also sponsored Singapore Management University's "Ankit Fadia Information Security Award", which is given annually to "an outstanding student"...." - real funny
nd o'yea I claim to have saved the world from a flock of mutated pigeons (I was actually helping CBI)
thaht id  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.145.143.46 (talk) 12:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  hackingmobilephones.com 

message: The "About" page on his website claims that he's currently pursuing a Bachelors degree in Computer Science from Stanford (but that's not a credible source); so does this 2003 issue of Stanford Magazine (I'm unsure about the credibility of this magazine). Was he ever actually enrolled at Stanford, later dropped out or is still in the same program after 7 years? Another bluff? ಠ_ಠ --59.95.117.122 (talk) 09:03, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Education 

message: Updated the source for this section and also the award amount. It is not $50,000, but is $1,000.
--Siddheshp (talk) 04:07, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ankit Fadia Study Award 

message: was recently added (improperly) to the article.  It was removed (with cause) however the source appears to be reliable with respect to other information about this BLP subject, notably the aforementioned book.  Any issues?  little green rosetta 16:39, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''How to Unblock Everything'' 

message: Ankita Fadia is a very controversial figure with most of this claims being ripped apart in media and in blogs. For example here is one collection at Errata: Charlatan - Ankit Fadia and a very revealing article by Charles Assisi in Forbes India magazine titled Ankit Fadia Revealed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amarendra (talk • contribs) 14:17, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Blogs and other self-published sources cannot be used as sources here per WP:BLPSPS, neither can attrition.org which is described in its Wikipedia article as a "privately owned and operated hobby-site" (or securityerrata.org, which carries the same article). January (talk) 10:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: What about a physically published magazine by an established journalist publisher? The physical copy of the Forbes magazine also carries this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.229.72.165 (talk) 07:56, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The response above related to attrition.org, not Forbes. January (talk) 22:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

text: No, it can't be used at all. See WP:SPS - "Never use self-published sources as third-party sources about living people, even if the author is an expert, well-known professional researcher, or writer." January (talk) 20:59, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy 

message: There are now two separate references to the site being hacked in 2012, one in the career section and one in a section of its own. Are these describing the same incidents? Also does the Youtube video confirm his site was hacked in response to a challenge Fadia issued or is it a video of Fadia issuing a challenge? (I can't view it, apparently its not available in my country.) January (talk) 07:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need to have a separate section called "Personal Website Compromised" (WP:UNDUE/WP:CSECTION). As much as I agree with whatever attrition.org says about Fadia, there's hardly any WP:RS-compliant criticism of Fadia, compared to the positive coverage he has received. utcursch | talk 12:29, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Does the Youtube video confirm a connection between the incident and the challenge on Tech Toyz (I can't judge this because I can't view the Youtube video)? Neither of the other two sources do, so if the video doesn't this is WP:SYNTH. January (talk) 15:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Try http://www.youtube.com/v/a93qi17GqMU utcursch | talk 20:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't view that one either, same problem. January (talk) 11:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 hacking 

message: Fadia started a degree at Stanford but dropped out according to an editor who contacted them (see Education discussion above), although there is no secondary source for this. Is it misleading to only state that he started a degree, since the article can't state that he didn't graduate without resorting to WP:OR (the user I just reverted seems to think so)? January (talk) 10:00, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are requested to comment on the content, and not the creator. Please try to avoid personal attacks while displaying your views. If you have any changes to be suggested to the article, feel free to do so. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stanford 

message: THAT IS WHAT IS THIS FADIA  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1plus7is8 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  EMPTY VESSELS SOUND MUCH 

message: Most of the part from this article seems to be written like an advertisement. I think very soon we need to mark this article as an "Advertisement".
: It's more like, IMO opposite of advertisement. //Eatcha (talk) 14:19, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Written like an advertisement ? 

message: The lead states "He has been accused of plagiarism and false claims by leading publications such as Forbes and Sunday Guardian." The Sunday Guardian is actually reporting allegations made by Twitter/Facebook users, the Forbes article is an opinion piece and reflects the author's view, not Forbes' as a whole. This either needs to be reworded or removed. January (talk) 16:33, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Ankit Fadia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091121015512/http://www.mtvindia.com:80/news/news.php?id=3419 to http://www.mtvindia.com/news/news.php?id=3419
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Today i was browsing his page and i found constant manipulating from non registered or verified users. Can the admin add page protection? - Jakecalder (talk) 18:46, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requesting for a Page protection