Talk:Ankit Fadia/Archive 1

Looks like Self Promotion
This article reads more like a CV rather than a wiki article. :( Is this self promotion or what???


 * Fixed this last month. 220.227.179.4 07:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


 * That anon was me. Session expired. utcursch | talk 07:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

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


 * The article includes a link to this post on the FSF-Friends mailing list. utcursch | talk 07:20, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

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'


 * Wikipedia doesn't claim that Ankit Fadia was contacted by any classified agency. Wikipedia article just states that Ankit Fadia has claimed to have done these things and provides references. utcursch | talk 07:22, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

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.


 * The article doesn't exist because Ankit Fadia "is a self proclaimed hacker". The article exists because Ankit Fadia passes WP:BIO. utcursch | talk 07:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

not appropriate for a biography in wikipedia
If Ankit Fadia should be added as a biography in Wikipedia, 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 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)
 * I have sprotected the article. Lets keep it that way till the IPs and usernames are blocked. - Aksi_great (talk) 13:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

If so, then don't comment any more on gather. I will leave your place but you too leave. Stop badmouthing alongwith ankit fadia. I will handle it my self. As I mentioned before also, I have nothing to do with you peoples. Why are you supporting Ankit Fadia in this way by commenting on my gather.com articles. India is a democratic country where you or no one else is allowed to stop any one by suggesting, giving their opinions or protesting against frauds. I hope we will now not be a part of this debate any more. My policy is to LIVE and let others LIVE, but not peoples like Ankit Fadia.

Thnx Admins.

Ankit Fadia Vouched by Delhi Police
I have removed another long rant by Kalpesh Sharma. It clearly violates WP:NOR. He clearly does not want to write an encyclopedia. Note that User:Kalpesh Sharma had been indef-blocked by Samir yesterday. So this was also a case of block-evasion. All future comments from Kalpesh Sharma from anonymous IPs will be removed by me unless he applies for an unblock from his username.


 * I don't know what Kalpesh is leading to, but I'm not interested. It clearly violates WP:NOR. Hence I propose to remove this section from the talk page if no one objects. Wikipedia is not a forum for this person to launch his personal vendetta against Ankit Fadia. I've had enough of it. - Aksi_great (talk) 11:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * And nor are we interested in what Kalpesh has to say. Just want to know whether Kalpesh has been banned from further editing? Also want to mention that I was brought to this link by a digg news The article calls Kalpesh a vandal. -- Root exploit 11:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * He has vandalised this article many times before. Evidence of his disruption can be read here. I have given him a final warning to follow wikipedia policies of WP:NOR, WP:V and WP:RS today failing which I will start blocking his ips for disruption. - Aksi_great (talk) 12:01, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't want this turn to a flame war but I really have a serious question for Kalpesh. Neither Ankit has a bugtraq entry nor Kalpesh has one. Neither Ankit has come up with any new security concept nor Kalpesh has come up. All I can see for a google search on "Kalpesh Sharma" are some reports in which he was arrested and his own "self-claims". Apart from this Kalpesh Sharma has not made any significant contributions to the 'hacking' community (I doubt whether he understands the meaning of this word). So on what basis is Kalpesh abusing others? -- Root exploit 12:07, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * None. But this discussion about Kalpesh Sharma is moot. It has already been decided by the wikipedia community that Kalpesh Sharma is a non-notable person. Hence his article was deleted from wikipedia. I would appreciate if we do not discuss Kalpesh Sharma here. - Aksi_great (talk) 12:16, 19 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Dear Kalpesh, thank you so much for the information. As per your suggestion, I've edited the article and included the information about Ankit Fadia being declared "Person of the Year" by Limca Book of Records in 2002. Next time when you put email headers, please remove the e-mail addresses, as they can be picked up by spammers' bots. Thank you for your valuable information. utcursch | talk 12:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Kalpesh on Wikipedia
Hello, I want to refer the following notable reliable source to be edited to ankit fadia's page, about the details of ankit fadia mentioned in 'take aways' and 'did you know section of article'.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/101014/hacking_a_fullstop_on_esystem.html

According to information posted on wikipedia about the associated content website, check that how this is notable reliable source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Content#Content

This is a notable reliable source similar to the source which was edited by administrator utcursch and can be edited because of following reasons:

Details about this Notable Reliable Source on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Content

So I request any administrator to follow the same procedure as utcursch followed in the case of limca book of record mentioned above on the same page.

Thnx.

From: Kalpesh Sharma
 * Associated Content is not a reliable source. -- Samir धर्म 22:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Why? can you give details. Utcursch has edited limca book of record on my request from following source:

http://www.dailyexcelsior.com/02aug30/national.htm#9

Give me an explanation that on what basis the associated content mentioned above is not reliable source and how daily excelsior is reliable ?

Thnx From: Kalpesh Sharma


 * From the FAQ: "Anyone who is 13 years of age or over can become an AC Content Producer and submit text, voice, video and images...". Also, "content submitted for non-payment is immediately posted on Associated Content. Here are some of the articles published at Associated Content: Andy Roddick sucksWhy Pirates of the Caribbean Sucks and Johnny Depp Can't Be Any Gayer Than Keith RichardsWhy I Hate the Detroit Tigers and Why Baseball SucksWhy Hockey Sucks... If we start creating encyclopedia based on these things, you know what'll be the result. utcursch | talk 03:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Associated Content is absolutely not a reliable source. Period.  This is an encyclopedia, not a blog to vent one's hatred for Ankit Fadia.  -- Samir धर्म  07:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I think time for AGF is now over. Kalpesh Sharma is neither willing nor is he capable to read and understand wikipedia policies and has been wasting our time for the past month. - Aksi_great (talk) 07:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

This message is for every one from management of wikipedia to administrators ! I am not here now with any intention to fight with wikipedia admins. But as concerns to policies and what's right and to be edited in wikipedia. So, this is the final warning for Aksi to not edit any off topic matters such as "I am wasting time". Do you mean that what I am doing that's all wrong and what Aksi is posting is right? Do you all administrators are here to fight so many with one? Come one by one and out of wikipedia website if you all have so much desire to fight out? You have no rights to comment on my or ankit fadia's issue where the discussion of topic is something else. Any number of times and what ever I think according to my opinion is right, I will post several thousands of time. If the wiki admins think that it's wrong to any extent then prove and don't allow me to edit. But no such comments which continously aksi is giving. What a worst adminstrator is this aksi, telling me anything on wikipedia website itself and on other hand saying I am doing self publicity. This is all also giving me publicity which is a part of war. Then ?

Now let's come to point ! I know that any one from 13 years old age can submit content. But every content is verified and when accepted by the content manager then only it's published. So, in this sense it can be said as reliable.

Secondly, it's presence on wikipedia and the words such as, "Associated Content, "The People's Media Company" provides quality editorials, newsworthy and timely information and facts, and quality content and informational articles. " used on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Associated_Content#Content proves that it can be trusted as a notable source.

Even then if you have any reasons. Then let me know ! IT's not a force to post the contents, instead this all is treated by me as a part of discussion with you all. And again I say that what ever matter is between ankit fadia or kalpesh sharma, no one from wikipedia has been given right to put their nose into some one other's matter.

Finally, I would like to request that please all administrators and management of wikipedia do something of this guy Aksi Great? -- From: Kalpesh Sharma


 * The Associated Content article is unreferenced with respect to various attacking claims made against Ankit Fadia. It's quite poorly written.  I have no idea who these content managers are, but frankly, if this is indicative of the quality of the articles found on that website, there's no doubt in my mind that any Associated Content article should be scrutinized with a veritable mountain of salt.  Indeed, I think I'll edit Associated Content -- Samir धर्म  02:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * "This message is for every one from management of wikipedia to administrators!" -- we know that this message is from Kalpesh Sharma. "...every content is verified and when accepted by the content manager then only it's published." -- this doesn't make the source a reliable source. Going by what you say, we'll have to include "Andy Roddick sucks" in the article Andy Roddick. Thank you for bringing to our attention the article Associated Content -- it has been tagged as unreferenced. "I would like to request that please all administrators and management of wikipedia do something of this guy Aksi Great?" -- please see Requests for comment/User conduct if you think that Aksi_great, myself or Samir have been abusing administrator privileges. Thanks. utcursch | talk 12:42, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

More trolling by 59.95.200.113 (KS) removed by me. Also reverted vandalism by KS where he tries to impersonate me and then root exploit. - Aksi_great (talk) 14:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The above IP has been blocked by me. Enough of this trolling. - Aksi_great (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * If no-one objects, I am going to archive this talk page. This is supposed to be a talk page to discuss the article, not to act as a public forum for Mr. Kalpesh Sharma. - Aksi_great (talk) 13:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There would be no need to archive this *crap*. Just remove it from the page. &mdash; Nearly Headless Nick  14:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * For the records:. utcursch | talk 09:49, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 14:14, 1 May 2016 (UTC)