Jump to content

Talk:Anonymous (hacker group)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 187.107.30.9 (talk) at 20:02, 10 June 2012. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Former good article nomineeAnonymous (hacker group) was a Social sciences and society good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 12, 2008Articles for deletionKept
March 19, 2008Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
March 11, 2009Articles for deletionKept
April 26, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former good article nominee


Edit Request

I'm not sure if it's just for me, but the quote from trent peacock in the "Origins as a concept and a meme" part of the "background section of the arcticle is decentralized. It's pretty noticeable since the text is "invading" the image.


This article has multiple issues

In the DOS days software was created & distributed for free via the dialup zmodem fidonet networked BBS systems, even electronic music was created & distributed for free, this was known as filesharing, later came licensing or registration fees & this is why warez groups & warez legions were formed to crack the software, its not software piracy, its simply keeping the system accountable as a opensource community as it was originally created, if the program is not opensource then most likely it is useless. The Warez community migrated over to the internet but they broke the creed for they utilised a network which wanted specific information about people, like real name, email, drivers license & so forth, their is no need to interrogate people. With BBS systems all you did was provide a username so you could communicate with other people on the BBS, you did not have to provide a passcode, drivers license, email, real name, just your cybername & the system worked well before it was corrupted. Their is no way humanity will evolve unless opensource technologies are employed.

The people who created the codebase to the IMC Independent Media Centres used anonymous names & this codebase was used as the engine of wikipedia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CEe7qhlFNs4 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.212.227 (talk) 01:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

meme, really?

please change from internet meme to self described hacktivist group. more accurate from what Ive read — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.144.86.95 (talk) 01:50, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Things can have many different names, appearances, methods and purposes. A rock can be a paperweight, a weapon, a seat or a flour grinder. A stick is kindling and a dog toy, and also a lever. Anonymous is any number of combinations of any number of people doing any imaginable thing that people can do. No label is any more or less accurate than the rest. As long as it's sourced, it belongs in the article. InedibleHulk (talk) 01:05, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Penyulap ☏


Anonymous isn't a group. It's a "mass noun" like the article says. Anyone can be Anonymous. For example the group that launched the attack on the British Government's website just recently have absolutely no connection to the group that attacked Sony's websites and Playstation Store. The only thing that connects them is the name Anonymous. The group who attacked the British Government's website will simply have heard of attacks by Anonymous in the past and thought "Hey that sounds cool, let's do that!".

What Anonymous is, at it's most basic level, is a way for computer criminals to taunt their victims after the fact. They're saying "Haha, you can't get me!" And they can afford to do that because they're protected by their anonymity, hence the name Anonymous.

Of course, they aren't really protected by their anonymity. Not completely. They just like to think they are. They can be found, some more easily than others, as is evidenced by all of the raids and arrests. But the problem law enforcement agencies have when it comes to Anonymous is that most of them are morons. They simply cannot grasp any of what I've just said. They think that because the name Anonymous is used by a multitude of people, that they all must be connected. It MUST be an organization of some sort. So they end up trying to track a group that simply doesn't exist, when really they should just be tracking down individuals like it's any other case of computer crime. Because it is just any other case of computer crime. The name Anonymous is just tagged on as a sort of anarchistic "Fuck you".--77.103.237.230 (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous China?

I'm curious whether the editors who frequent this page have any intention to describe the group's China 'chapter,' so to speak. Since its launch a couple weeks ago it has been quite active (and extraordinarily ambitious).[1] Homunculus (duihua) 03:47, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 15 April 2012

One idea. To equality. Schematics not available in hard copy.

124.180.119.9 (talk) 01:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: Celestra (talk) 15:19, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rtnews template

I've removed the Russia Today news template from the page, as it had raised concern because it pointed to a single trending news page, rather than a selection of trend pages, and after discussion in the appropriate places, it's easier to remove it than it is to add lots of other trend pages, as I don't know of any (don't have time to look). Penyulap ☏ 03:33, 20 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:NoActaColor.jpg

Remove this image. There is no indication (or source for it) that it has been actually used by Anonymous. Wikipedia is not a place to post OC. 212.87.13.66 (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ~Adjwilley (talk) 23:04, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote 2 link should be changed to this URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20090207141954/http://www.cityonahillpress.com/article.php?id=1050

Nevermind. It's working now. Must have been the connection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.98.63 (talk) 23:54, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Operation Phobos-Gone?

There is a new Anonymous operation being set up. It is called Operation Phobos-Gone. It's on blogspot and twitter ever since. I cannot add it because there's no reliable source for it. 115.135.144.255 (talk) 18:26, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia policies require a reliable source, twitter and blogspot are generally not reliable. All I can find are what look like user created entries on pastebin and blogspot, with zero references from any reliable source. In fact, I now strongly suspect they are wholly made up by one person. -84user (talk) 20:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. Starkiller88 (talk · contribs) admitted to making the whole thing up when I took a few redirects he'd created to RfD, but he still won't drop it. From this edit it is blatantly obvious that the IP who started this discussion section is a sockpuppet. I've sent Starkiller a level 4 warning for long-term vandalism (between this and his insistence that there will never be another mission to Phobos at any time in the future - both of which appear to be WP:POINT responses to BatteryIncluded (talk · contribs) and myself removing OR which he inserted into Fobos-Grunt - he's been little but disruptive since January). If he does it again, just go straight to AIV or ANI. --W. D. Graham 22:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Anonymous Operation

Prompted by Talk:Anonymous Operation, I have redirected that wholly unsourced article to this one, Anonymous (group). Although I found reliable sources for the network AnonOps and connections with the Anonymous "brand", I found nothing for the specific name "Anonymous Operation". Sources for anonops connection: [2] , [3]. -84user (talk) 20:06, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Edit request on 21 May 2012

Typo change under Membership.

Please change "Anonymous is spread over m any " to "Anonymous is spread over many "

. The problem is just the space in "many"

 Fixed Thanks. Dru of Id (talk) 22:59, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

vreau sa intru in organizatie


82.77.143.212 (talk) 11:06, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done da fuk? Egg Centric 21:31, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A kid in Arlington is a Anonymous and FBI are looking for him.

A kid in Arlington is a Anonymous and FBI are looking for him. His name start with sac but they only know that. I BEG YOU GUYS TO help the kid Anonymous.please help the kid guys. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.111.4.142 (talk) 02:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 2 June 2012

There are some incorrect details under the 'Sony' heading. Anonymous were not responsible for the attacks as a collective, one AWOL member went off and conducted the attacks alone and was exiled from the group immediately afterwards. Anonymous submitted statements saying that they were not responsible, however the lone attacker submitted conflicting statements saying that they were. People shared the ones saying that they were responsible as it was an easy answer and most people who do not know what anonymous truly stand for would assume that they were responsible anyway.

Because of the nature of the anonymous, being that they post all information 'anonymously' there is no way to determine who creates a rumour for fun, who posts an incorrect statement believing themselves to be correct without the backing of other members, and official statements which are discussed in the official anonops internet relay chats and then posted by a respected member.

86.161.230.154 (talk) 00:03, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I can only find one reference to Sony in the entire article, and that is in the quote box by Marc Garneau. I can't find the Sony heading you're talking about. Could you please be more specific about what needs to be changed? ~Adjwilley (talk) 00:14, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Mdann52 (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

other lang

kindly add hi:एनोनिमस . thanks --101.214.61.138 (talk) 08:12, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anonymous_(hacker_group)&oldid=496950233"