Talk:Center for Democracy and Technology
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Fair use rationale for File:CDT logo.gif
File:CDT logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
Added some stuff
Hey, I added some information about the particulars of what the CDT does. Feel free to make any changes you feel are necessary. I didn't add very many new sources and mainly used the Google Books sources that were already on the reference list. I felt these were adequate. However, I felt I'd somewhat exhausted those sources, so if the article is to expand more I'd recommend finding new sources of evidence. I also took out a link to "Jerry Berman" that links back to the original page. I would suggest Berman have his own Wikipedia page instead of having it redirect to the CDT page, which doesn't make as much sense. Christopher998 (talk) 03:04, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the improvements, and I agree about the Jerry Berman link.
- However, I have removed the section added here, first because it appears to have been copied from the cited source () without indicating that it was a quote, and without permission (cf. WP:COPYPASTE), and secondly because on Wikipedia (or more generally in most encyclopedias), precise and factual statements are preferred over vague expressions like "to empower families with the information and tools they need to protect themselves online" or "CDT has been a leader in the effort to assure the safety of children online" - which however are perfectly appropriate in corporate self-descriptions and promotional texts, such as the one that this was taken from. See also WP:PEACOCK. Regards, HaeB (talk) 11:23, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
I work at CDT as the Senior Staff Technologist there. I saw that the statement that we are 50% funded by corporations and realized that was based off of older financial statements. So I've updated that text and the citation to reflect the current figure of 33%. --Joebeone (Talk) 19:31, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
- Reverted previous change per organizational policy against making changes to our own WP page. --Joebeone (Talk) 17:05, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
I find the wording of the history section to be biased. At CDT, the goal is not to preserve an "inside strategy" and a "seat at the table"... those kinds of statements come most often from detractors and critics of CDT (some of whom are my friends), like Chris Soghoian and Declan McCullagh. I would describe our strategy as making the least worst and most positive outcome, and we do recognize that in order to work in DC, you cannot play an antagonistic game that other organizations may choose to use. Anyway, I could offer up a suggested toning down of that rhetoric to reflect a more nuanced version of our strategy (for example, see the arguments here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-harris/cispa-changes-show-power-_b_3141735.html ). However, I wouldn't want to make this change without someone that could check my own bias as a CDT staffer. --Joebeone (Talk) 19:37, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
- Update: I won't be making these changes, but would ask other editors to re-evaluate that language. --Joebeone (Talk) 17:06, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Content was added to create a more informative page that parallels other non-profit pages. I'd also consider flagging the history section for biased content and will consider editing if fellow wiki editors weigh in. Overoak (talk) 23:09, 4 June 2014 (UTC)