Jump to content

Talk:Project Chanology

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Teggles (talk | contribs) at 04:03, 25 January 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

This may become one of the most important things to happen on the internet. I wouldn't be so quick to delete it.

This is an on-going event and is expanding rapidly, it should be maintained. LamontCranston 19:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is getting a lot of play over at Digg and other social media sites (here here and here for some examples). One of those links to a Wired article and I'm sure we can find lots of other news articles detailing this. I certainly wouldn't "speedy" delete this. Put it up for deletion the old fashioned way. JHMM13(Disc) 08:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Aside from the fact that the article still doesn't assert the notability, Digg and other social media sites (i.e. any site with user-generated content) don't cut it as reliable sources. Dethme0w (talk) 08:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you need reliable media - Australian Personal Computer magazine has picked it up. They're the largest PC print publication in Australia. Article here. Deletion is wrong at this stage. Give it a few days. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flow aus (talk • contribs) 09:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should add that to the external links at least. I have removed the tags, but the article needs inline references. Dethme0w (talk) 09:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wired magazine is covering the attacks now. [1] Does that count as a reliable source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avpmechman (talk • contribs) 00:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion

Although I do think this whole thing is quite funny, 13 year old script kiddies on 4chan aren't significant enough for a Wikipedia article, especially without citations. DDoSes happen thousands of times ever day, not every one deserves an article. I've nominated for prod. Miserlou (talk) 20:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The external links and linking to other wiki Scientology pages cover it, if you need to be redundent then add citations LamontCranston 7:45, 25 January (UTC)

Notability

WP:NOTABILITY states that a topic is notable if "it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". This topic has been covered by publications such as Wired[2], APC Magazine[3], National Post[4] and Sky News[5]. This is clear adherence of WP:NOTABILITY and WP:WEB, meaning that the article can be kept. Any attempts to delete this article are likely to fail. --Teggles (talk) 04:03, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Project_Chanology&oldid=186747026"