Talk:SANS Institute

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Complaint[edit]

No controversy section? This reads somewhat like an advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.249.208.150 (talk) 18:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Still getting coverage.[edit]

  • this was this week. If there's a desire to clean up overly promotional language, then please do so, but this is a real organization, does real things, gets mentions and coverage in multiple RS'es. Jclemens (talk) 08:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no question that the SANS institute is noteworthy and this article is needed, but it has some problems, and part of it look like a puff piece. As of this time (12/14/2017 3:31 pm CST) six of the 16 citations are from the SANS own website, not exactly unbiased. The section on Faculty is really a puff piece. I did a Google search on several of the names, and the only claim to fame I could find is being a SANS instructor. Even reading the SANS bios, I could not find anything most of them had done, other than be SANs instructors. 1 is an author of a few books, none of the others are. I am not an experienced Wikipedian, so I hope someone else cleans this up — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E7C2:BEF0:F9E9:3EA0:2EE7:5AD8 (talk) 21:35, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the list of 'fellows' for the reasons previously mentioned. None of these appear to be notable individuals, and this appears to be a backdoor method to establish notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6001:E7C2:BEF0:F9E9:3EA0:2EE7:5AD8 (talk) 17:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When you change article content, please do not forget to use the edit summary. Using that helps us regulars distinguish your edits from those of vandals. Thanks! Dawnseeker2000 17:23, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]