User talk:SimonWiseman

Hello, SimonWiseman, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement.

Happy editing! SwisterTwister talk 18:55, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Hi!

Hello! SimonWiseman, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse, an awesome place to meet people, ask questions, and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Rosiestep (talk) 01:09, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stegware

Hi Simon, many thanks for your article about Stegware. I don't think it fits Wikipedia's guidelines for notability as it is not a widely used term (for now). I am also concerned it may sound promotional or biased to McAffee as the article basically claims the firm first used the term (the reference does not proof this) and then goes on to talk about how the same firm has a solution. I have referred this to the main article for now until Stegware is more widely discussed. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:06, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stegware revisited

Agreed it is a new term. The referenced article defines it, and Google says it's a first in that nobody else defines it. But by redirecting the new page to the old Steganography page you have introduced circular references which is making everything confusing. I don't see any bias towards McAfee as it isn't the name of a product or service. They are drawing attention to a problem with the use of steganography, but (bizarrely) aren't offering a solution. The main steganography page is rather inadequate when it comes to the use of Stegware as it doesn't cover any of the modern techniques. It needs serious work on it to add this to make it an article on the encoding techniques, but then it seems right to have a separate article on how this is exploited in cyber attacks, as opposed to its use in covert communication for example.

SimonWiseman (talk) 11:21, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the original Stegware article mentioned an online service provided by McAfee, so that makes it kind of promotional. The other source provided is a McAfee blog. This proves they use the term, but not that they introduced it. I found a couple of examples of the term that predate the McAfee blog. This all seems a bit like WP:NEO to me. I'll resolve the circular ref. Maybe the target article can be expanded to talk about that problem. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:34, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me at the reference you found? Even better if someone else invented the term. Yes McAfee have stood up a website to do some analysing, but it's not a service in the sense of paying for it. Indeed the article needs expanding to cover the issues involved. It's gonna take time as the references to that kind of thing are not very definitive - more blogs from vendors! I will start on this and once got some worthy material together the page can be re-instated.

SimonWiseman (talk) 11:51, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find that particular source any more. To be honest, I clicked around quite a bit at the time and can't retrace my steps. I found one entry from August, but that turned out to be an essay on linkedin by a McAfee exec. Interestingly, the one use of the word that predates this, is in post war Germany where stegware was used for army surplus being sold off. I have expanded the Surplus store article and redirected Stegware (Germany). _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 15:20, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, SimonWiseman. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Content Threat Removal, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Widefox; talk 14:25, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]