| Revision as of 11:57, 14 December 2006 editUtcursch (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Administrators163,365 editsm →Article coming under attack: m← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:57, 14 December 2006 edit undo59.95.201.18 (talk) Kalpesh Sharma Group MembersNext edit → | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| :] may be a good start for WP:RCU. I'm positive that he is also ]. -- ] 01:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC) | :] may be a good start for WP:RCU. I'm positive that he is also ]. -- ] 01:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| ::There seems to be this guy called Kalpesh Sharma, who is disgruntled because he hasn't received much media publicity inspite of his hacking claims. And probably, because of ]. He's been badmouthing Ankit Fadia at , etc. I guess a checkuser resulting in ban on IPs/sockpuppets should suffice. ] | ] 11:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC) | ::There seems to be this guy called Kalpesh Sharma, who is disgruntled because he hasn't received much media publicity inspite of his hacking claims. And probably, because of ]. He's been badmouthing Ankit Fadia at , etc. I guess a checkuser resulting in ban on IPs/sockpuppets should suffice. ] | ] 11:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC) | ||
| There is nothing wrong with others. It's all wrong with Indian Misplaced Pages Administrators who have been given rights to modify contents for well purpose of wikipedia. But so sad that though a lot of evidence appears about ankit fadia on internet as well as on this same[REDACTED] page, you peoples are doing arguements to find reasons. I saw various edits from all you three admins and sent a mail to HO Misplaced Pages with the contents that you reported to be wrong. You want to know who is using this IP? They are all the members of all kalpesh sharma group sharing single IP. Do what you can, do this protest will not stop ? Because peoples of country are being saved. nothing is being done wrong by saying the fact and truth about ankit fadia. You are all three discussing and finding about various reasons to anyway edit ankit fadia contents to what it was and don't want peoples to see the right thing. This is a challenge that if you find any content edited in ankit fadia wiki which is wrong, then come out and debate ? | |||
| Misplaced Pages is a reputed name for reputed peoples. Not for Ankit Fadia. If one or two or three articles were wrongly edited, we all might have not edited so many pages. but you are trying to specify that all the content edited about ankit fadia is wrong. Only you peoples are right ? All others are wrong is that what you mean. Then accept our challenge. | |||
| one more thing utcarsch, if you think what you mentioned above is right then you are wrong. Mr. Kalpesh always goes with evidence and proofs and that too right in front of eyes instead of barking on[REDACTED] like ankit fadia's article. As concerns to reputation how can you claim that this editing on[REDACTED] is because of media publicity. The pages on[REDACTED] have been edited by our group only from last 15 20 days, whereas ankit fadia's reputation is on net in the first thirty searches of google. First clear your concept and then speak. Go and view the logs of all the pages and urls that are posted in the article written on gather.com by kalpesh sharma itself. | |||
| What ever you[REDACTED] administrators do, We are not going to stop protesting against ankit fadia. Got the point ! Heavy bye-bye | |||
Revision as of 12:57, 14 December 2006
 | Biography Unassessed | ||||||
| |||||||
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 19 August 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Looks like Self Promotion
This article reads more like a CV rather than a wiki article. :( Is this self promotion or what???
Age
According to this, Fadia is 22 as of 2006, so I just plain took it out until somebody can fill in the exact date. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 08:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
is he a cracker
http://shahaabansari.com/science-technology/computers/ankit-fadia-the-real-picture/ dont know whether the above link is liable or not.found it in clusty search
have we lost our senses?
citation #2 (chennaionline.com) not only claims that he was contacted by a 'classified agency' to 'decipher' a bin-laden related message, but that he 'also handles the Asia operations of a classified intelligence agency'. Now come on, he either does handle asia operations, or we know about it. can't be both.
unfortunately, a simple phrase search: "ankit fadia" "bin laden" shows us that the same sentence, with the same wording appears on his official site and on many copies of his 'CV' stored on several different websites. As an alternative topic, I can suggest comparing different versions of his CV to see how much knowledge he gains between seminars :)
what i'm trying to say is, if i wanted to be the World's Most Strongest Password Cracker Ever on wikipedia, all i had to do was make a website supporting my claim, a few seminars in india (a few dollars arrange this easily) and a writeup on an online-only publication, which hopefully the reporter will use very little effort for, quoting directly from my 'CV' and 'official website'
should be deleted
This article must be deleted. Ankit Fadia is a self proclaimed hacker and the Hacking community doesn't acknowledge him as a hacker. Most of his books have also been copied from other genuine books. An article in BBC no way proves that whatever is stated is true. I think there should be a vote whether we must keep this article.
Ankit Fadia doesn't have even one Bugtraq entry in http://www.securityfocus.com/bid
Also, one thing I would like to say. If there is an article on Ankit Fadia, why don't we keep articles on other good hackers like Luny, etc. who are really hackers.
not appropriate for a biography in wikipedia
If Ankit Fadia should be added as a biography in Misplaced Pages, then there are many others who should be added. For example there are many genuine Hackers who feature in Bugtraq and various security lists.
Though these people are less heard of but they have done more to the hacking community than Ankit Fadia. As a proof their names appear on many security sites and organizations. If we don't have biographies on these people, we shouldn't be having biographies on Ankit Fadia too.
- If proof exists of their notability, I see no reason for these articles not to exist. Go ahead and create articles, providing references. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 13:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
not worthy enough of a biography
I agree with the above mentioned points. There are thousands of good hackers in this world. Ankit Fadia is not even close to being a hacker. He is a preacher and that too mostly for school or college students. Most of his presentations and books are merely a copy of other books. He doesn't deserve to be present here as a biography. I agree, if there is a biography about Ankit Fadia, why not a biography about the persons listed in the above comment because they have done something more constructive for the hacking community. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 220.227.179.5 (talk • contribs) .
- If you want this article deleted, please don't tag it again for speedy deletion. You can request for it to be sent to articles for deletion. Petros471 10:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
Criticism
The criticism section in this article is totally unverified. I did a google search, but could not find any verifiable source for it except for some forums. I do not think that such forums are considered to be suitable to meet WP:V especially for bios of living people. Hence, I am removing the section. If I do come across some verifiable source in the future, I will personally add the secion. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 12:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed, per WP:BLP, these uncited comments can and should be removed immediately -- Samir धर्म 13:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Article coming under attack
I have been watching over this article since a long time now. A lot of new users and ips are adding information into the article which violates WP:BLP. What can be done about it? I removed a lot of unverified information from the article today. I indef-blocked a user "Ankit Fadia Hacking" for username. He had created a lot of articles with the same content advertising his cause to malign Ankit Fadia. . I am going to request a checkuser to eliminate all the disruptive socks and ips targetting this article. What about permanent semi-protection? - Aksi_great (talk) 17:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
- User:Kalpesh Sharma may be a good start for WP:RCU. I'm positive that he is also User:Hacking Expert. -- Samir धर्म 01:38, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- There seems to be this guy called Kalpesh Sharma, who is disgruntled because he hasn't received much media publicity inspite of his hacking claims. And probably, because of Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Kalpesh Sharma. He's been badmouthing Ankit Fadia at GatherLUG-Indore, WordPress etc. I guess a checkuser resulting in ban on IPs/sockpuppets should suffice. utcursch | talk 11:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
There is nothing wrong with others. It's all wrong with Indian Misplaced Pages Administrators who have been given rights to modify contents for well purpose of wikipedia. But so sad that though a lot of evidence appears about ankit fadia on internet as well as on this same[REDACTED] page, you peoples are doing arguements to find reasons. I saw various edits from all you three admins and sent a mail to HO Misplaced Pages with the contents that you reported to be wrong. You want to know who is using this IP? They are all the members of all kalpesh sharma group sharing single IP. Do what you can, do this protest will not stop ? Because peoples of country are being saved. nothing is being done wrong by saying the fact and truth about ankit fadia. You are all three discussing and finding about various reasons to anyway edit ankit fadia contents to what it was and don't want peoples to see the right thing. This is a challenge that if you find any content edited in ankit fadia wiki which is wrong, then come out and debate ?
Misplaced Pages is a reputed name for reputed peoples. Not for Ankit Fadia. If one or two or three articles were wrongly edited, we all might have not edited so many pages. but you are trying to specify that all the content edited about ankit fadia is wrong. Only you peoples are right ? All others are wrong is that what you mean. Then accept our challenge.
one more thing utcarsch, if you think what you mentioned above is right then you are wrong. Mr. Kalpesh always goes with evidence and proofs and that too right in front of eyes instead of barking on[REDACTED] like ankit fadia's article. As concerns to reputation how can you claim that this editing on[REDACTED] is because of media publicity. The pages on[REDACTED] have been edited by our group only from last 15 20 days, whereas ankit fadia's reputation is on net in the first thirty searches of google. First clear your concept and then speak. Go and view the logs of all the pages and urls that are posted in the article written on gather.com by kalpesh sharma itself.
What ever you[REDACTED] administrators do, We are not going to stop protesting against ankit fadia. Got the point ! Heavy bye-bye
Categories: