Talk:Trust service provider

Draft:Trust service provider

Hi MorbidEntry, thanks for your feedback although it was not favourable in the first step.

I did rework the document. I think an initial disturbing issue was that I used lots of bullet points which made it appear rather like a definition than like a valid and balanced Wikipedia entry. Already initially I tried to complement the explaining part with aspects of vision, legal consideration and a global consideration and reflection (all substantiated by notable sources). I now enhanced these, made them more clear and expanded on the subject. I also added an important consideration of controversial aspects written by acclaimed researchers / notable sources.

Could you do me a favour and have a look at it again before I resubmit. Perhaps you have some additional suggestion how this article can be improved?

ScienceGuard (talk) 04:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to other wikipedia authors to contribute

Thank you for following my request to help improving this article. I revised it already completely and would now require some external inputs to make it better. Feel free to edit in the article like in a mutual research paper. Just make sure that everything you add it factually correct and comes with notable sources. ScienceGuard (talk) 13:13, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Resubmit

Article looks notable and well-sourced to me.

Evolution

In the controversy section, the missing technical depth and risks to privacy are main points of criticism. EU Commission' task force and ETSI are working on their improvements. Many of them are still in "draft status". Can anybody provide the right sources documenting this work so that the section controversy can be complemented and a section evolution can be added? ScienceGuard (talk) 08:27, 6 July 2016 (UTC)