Talk:Clean IT Project

	European Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the European Union on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European UnionWikipedia:WikiProject European UnionTemplate:WikiProject European UnionEuropean Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in 2014 Q1. Further details were available on the "Education Program:University of Michigan/SI 110: Introduction to Information (Winter 2014)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

Made me laugh.

Looking for real information, this isn't the right place to be.

It's obvious this topic is just about one vision on the Clean IT program, and that's the negative side. Censoring and such are themes known from the PIPA, SOPA and ACTA in the past, but it is not just about censoring the internet.

I'll recommend to remove this page from the wikipedia for in the case people are taking over the wrong information, like I was planning to do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.95.75.232 (talk) 14:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

solution: learning german and read the article there. ;D --Biha (talk) 00:04, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mission

The Clean IT project aims to start a constructive dialogue between governments, businesses and civil society and create a permanent platform for discussion. Furthermore, the project tries to jointly find a set of general principles on how to address the problem and an overview of best practices.

Not quite what the article says. Rich Farmbrough, 16:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC).[reply]

Revision

Hello! We are a group of students at the University of Michigan taking a class in which we study the effects of how information is transferred. In order for us to grasp a better understanding of this concept, first hand, our instructor has given us the assignment of finding a stub article on Wikipedia to evaluate, revise, and improve. As a group we plan on gaining a better understanding on Clean IT through effectively gathering credible sources of information and relaying them back to this page. Within the next couple of weeks we hope that our edits to this page will provide others with a more concrete foundation of Clean IT on a holistic basis.

Thank you Jamesbee33 (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)UMICH[reply]

Peer Review

Your group did an excellent job expanding the Clean IT Group article; there was a good flow as to how you organized the article. Specifically, the objectives section stood out and very clearly outlined the article. This subsection was neutral, impartial, and easy to read; I was able to clearly understand the subject of the Clean IT Group and what it was trying to accomplish. Furthermore, your group did an exceptional job detailing each section with additional links to your resources, structuring the subtitles, and providing a well-comprised list of participating countries and partners. I especially appreciated how your extensive list of the countries and partnerships included the official names of their organizations and their origins. The opposition subsection also offered a different perspective of the Clean IT Group; it helped provide a better understanding of the possible consequences this project holds and the certain groups that oppose these propositions. The only issue was the article sometimes switched to a one-person view; your group sometimes mentioned “we” in the article when explaining. It did not seem to be a direct quote from one of your resources but it was very brief and did not seem to impose a large issue. However, it was a bit confusing when reading about the proposals and history of the Clean IT Group. In conclusion, the entire article was well balanced; each section was equally detailed and clearly structured. Your group did a great job!Yaekim (talk) 01:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The group of University of Michigan students did a great job describing the Clean IT Group. Just from the talk page, I can tell that the group addressed the concerns of other contributors to the page. The group cited credible references, and it was nice to see different views such as from the governments and private organizations like Anonymous. The objective were laid out very neatly, and let me learn fluently about the project. One improvement the group could have made was eliminating the banner at the end of the page that describes the article as a snub. I recommend that since the group added credible references that it is no longer considered a snub article, and should not be listed as one. I also like the connections of other Wikipedia pages, and it allowed me the chance to broaden my knowledge on the subject. On the other hand, I would have liked to see more examples of what the Clean IT Project has done since its creation. In addition, it would have been nice to describe how the Clean IT project is funded, and specifically how much each nation has donated. Overall the group did an amazing job and the pictures help with the visual appeal of the page.Ploganat (talk) 02:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, the group did an amazing job of laying out the foundation of the Clean IT project and provided a lot of information that basically turned the “stub” Wikipedia article into a real Wikipedia article. I love how the article states the three main purposes of the Clean IT Project in its own separate section giving the reader an overview for the purpose of this project. The group also does a good job of laying out the article into separate sections so that the reader has a clear-cut way knowing what is being read and what it specifically relates to. The addition of the European Union flag along side the Clean IT Project banner was a great idea because it makes the article more appealing in the aspect that the article is not only thick text but also because the pictures are relevant to the topic. I think my favorite part of the article would have to the “Opposition” section because it deals with one my favorite hacker groups Anonymous. I think that the Clean IT Project is striving for a better Internet, but the reason Anonymous stands against them is also reasonable. Beyond all of this, I believe that the article could have improved in the aspect of having more sources. Though a lot of the information may have came from the general source of the Clean IT Project page, more sources would have definitely made the article stronger. There is a lot of text and it only totals to six separate sources. When I am saying sources, I am talking about reliable sources. The inclusion of a couple more would easily make the article more reliable. With this being said, the group did an amazing job of transforming a stub article into a strong Wikipedia page. Nhhuq (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think this group did a good job of showcasing all the aspects of the Clean IT project. It was a benefit to add in hyperlinks throughout the article, clarifying necessary terms or situations that the reader may not be aware of, such as links to certain groups' or organizations' websites. I was really impressed by how clear and laid out the article was, starting out with very understandable objectives, and moving on to aspects of the project that people oppose, under the "opposition" category. This allowed the reader to learn of multiple views regarding this project, as well as reasons that certain groups and people think that this act is actually detrimental to the internet and its users. I really appreciated the parts of the article that elaborated on HOW these groups believe that this project will eventually be detrimental to users, giving a full, fair chance to understand both arguments of either support or opposition. The views of specific opposition groups like "Anonymous" and "EDRi" were elaborated on in order to make the reader feel informed. One of the improvements I would make would be to include The Clean IT Project's responses to these opposers, which would make this article even more well rounded. Cbergin1995 (talk) 22:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]