Talk:Joel Zamel
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Skinnytony1 (talk) 07:42, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
- Skinnytony1 - Please, explain the reverts. The page looks messy, non-encyclopedic - just a pile up of unorganized information. I added a few more sources and it looks like you reverted my action without actually checking those sources, calling them unreliable. Yet, the articles are neutral in tone, comprehensive and very analytical. I did the digest from the article in order to organize properly the Lead Section and the Career Section and maybe to do some other changes in the future. I just don't understand, how this old version of the Lead is better and how it better defines a person? All the old citations are there as well. Please, verify and examine the new sources as my version seems much more encyclopedic than a pile up on unorganized info--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:209B:2918:232A:225B (talk) 07:15, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Also, explain, how you found the sources unreliable? Did you even read them?--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:209B:2918:232A:225B (talk) 07:17, 26 November 2019 (UTC) And the last thing - I'm willing to analyze the current sources for the Lead Section as it seems very selectively and taken out of the contest and based more on speculations than on the facts. This article doesn't seem to be completed but in transition of different facts and has to be re-organized.--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:209B:2918:232A:225B (talk) 07:23, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
- why do you keep on characterising Psy Group as "an agency specializing in counter-extremism activities" if you look at the history of Psy Group on the wiki page there's no activity that can be characterised as thus. I read the sources and they are not reliable. I'm going to revert some of the language back...do you have any interests in the subject because it seems like you are slowly whitewashing the page related to Pay Group/Zamel? Skinnytony1 (talk) 12:29, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- Skinnytony1 I have no interest at all, just trying to organize the article. The White Knight agency has former intelligence agents working and they collaborate with the governments on different subjects, including counter-extremism. This is a part of their activity. It doesn't mean that they don't do anything else, including social media campaigns or analytics or else but they do have intelligence professionals helping governments on the subject. And I don't understand why you don't trust the sources - are they compromised on Wikipedia or have any promotional information? Not really. Yet, there are more sources I can bring to show the White Knight is engaged in counter-extremism activity by gathering intelligence infromation among other things they do (not all of them positive, I must admit and I don't deny it). But the problem is that the article is completely outdated. For example, White Knight is a successor of Psy-Group (as the former ceased to exist legally), yet somehow it is written that these are two different companies operating now. Nonsense. This article is a complete mess full of outdated fragmentary information.--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:871:AFED:D5CA:6FA5 (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Updates
editLead Section. Small updates for the Lead Section - Ioco is the same Psy group according to the Daily Beast (the source used for the Lead Section).More wide description of Zamel's agencies activity - I think readers should know about it Career Section. More history on Zamel - when he gained visibility and caught attention of the media during Mueller investigations. Also, more about his agencies as these are the most relevant facts related to Zamel as a person. I used the old sources and added to new ones: https://forensicnews.net/2019/10/22/israeli-private-intelligence-firm-claimed-recruitment-of-khashoggi-prior-to-murder/ https://intpolicydigest.org/2019/10/17/the-crucial-role-of-powerbrokers-in-international-affairs/
both sources are related to the international politics and analysis
I hope these updates make the article more detailed and give a reader more understanding of a person's biography and his relevance. --2601:1C0:CB01:2660:75CD:A6E2:8EBA:C28F (talk) 04:14, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
White Knight
editI found that White Knight is a successor of Psy-Group which is no longer active. If you click on White Knight related page, you can easily find that White Knight = Psy-Group, so it looked like White Knight and Psy Group are different companies while it is not true. It is the same company that changed its business name. Let me know here if you have any questions--2601:1C0:CB01:2660:14D9:F6CE:27B:735F (talk) 04:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Request for photo?
editThe article has a photo of Joel Zamel ... is that sufficient? Or is the logo of either White Knight or Psy Group also required? Prisoner of Zenda (talk) 10:38, 4 September 2021 (UTC)