The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Kantara Initiative. Content may be merged at editorial discretion. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 01:58, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Identity Assurance Framework (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested proposed deletion: promotional and notability issues. This page definitely leaves you guessing as to what it is about, but it is apparently some sort of proposed protocol or project involving online identities:

The Identity Assurance Framework (IAF) provides operational policies to assure Relying Parties, End-Users, Government Agencies and Industry Communities have confidence in a Federated Identity where an Identity Provider (IdP) issues credentials. The degree of confidence in Identity assurance is represented by a commonly agreed-upon "level of assurance." The IAF specifies the way IdPs have to run their services and how the IdPs are audited to ensure they are operating their services in conformance with their proclaimed level(s) of assurance and the stated terms of service.

Page seems to be a substantial copy of this paper, see especially starting at section 2, apparently a self published source by the outfit promoting this. Article would also appear to be part of a walled garden with a number of similar articles (Kantara Initiative, Federated Identity, Liberty Alliance likely more). A note on the talk page reveals conflict of interest: this page has been created by the people who are promoting this. This may or may not fix copyright issues, but does seem to underline that this is a promotional insertion.

Sources are all to internally published materials, self-published sources like Docbox copies of Power Point slides, 404 links, or pages that do not obviously mention this particular whatever-it-is. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:20, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 17:21, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Merge into Kantara Initiative or Liberty Alliance. My bias as usual would be one well-sourced article about all three entities in plain English. But perhaps two articles on the initiative and alliance would be better than three. Each proposed document clearly does not merit a stand-alone encyclopedia article unless there are several independent sources. W Nowicki (talk) 18:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Fair suggestion, however, The Kantara Initiative and Liberty Alliance are two wholly separate legal entities. Also the Liberty Alliance is no longer operational. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.100.19 (talk) 18:28, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not a proposed protocol. It's a policy framework which is at the core of a trust framework certification program which has been adopted by the US government as part of the Obama Open Identit for Open Government Initiatove. It's adopted by the Federal Identity Access Management (FICAM) team and managed by the Feneral Services Administration. Also is relTed closely to the National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC). The domain of federated identity has changed much over the last 12 months and the article definitely needs a refresh. That said, this is implicated and evolving subject matter and I kindly request that we not delete the article because some people don't understand it. To expect that everyone can easily understand this topic easily is a very high bar to assume. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.118.100.19 (talk) 18:19, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It's true that writing style and neutrality issues are core concerns for me. I'd observe that your comment is much clearer than the article itself is. Your comment also suggests several possible merger and redirect targets, and that the named subject may be several layers of abstraction above where a readable and informative encyclopedia article would belong. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 18:52, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, there's some interesting sourcing in there, I'd like for the editors to be given some time to try to further improve the article page. — Cirt (talk) 20:58, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or redirect maybe to Kantara Initiative? Stuartyeates (talk) 21:57, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, causa sui (talk) 19:05, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Copyright violation from [1] mentioned above. The paper is distributed under a license which states that "No rights are granted to prepare derivative works of this Liberty Alliance Publication." making it unfree by Wikipedia's standards. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The article is not encyclopedic, it looks like it's just self-decriptive gobeldygook made further worthless by the amount of internal jargon used to "explain" things. I don't know if the topic should stay as an article, but if so, step one would be to delete all of the material and start over by writing explanatory sentences instead of copying gobeldygook and internal jargon. North8000 (talk) 03:01, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.