Talk:Timeline of events associated with Anonymous

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Internet culture  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Operation UFC[edit]

I heard that anonymous are attacking the ufc site for supporting sopa: just some references http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15IRZdEUO20&feature=player_embedded http://espn.go.com/mma/story/_/id/7510920/hackers-disrupt-ufc-online-second-attack-website http://mmaweekly.com/challenge-accepted-hackers-attack-ufc-president-dana-white

Operation Mayhem[edit]

Operation Mayhem is a current going Operation that involves the Guy Fawkes Virus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheDamox (talkcontribs) 00:34, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

    • This 'virus' was never confirmed to have anything to do with anonymous other than claims from a few people. A Dirty Watermelon (talk) 20:05, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

from Talk:Republican Party presidential primaries, 2012, potential resource[edit]

Iowa GOP worried by hacker threat to caucus vote "With two weeks left before Iowa's first-in-the-nation presidential caucuses, the Iowa Republican Party is taking steps to secure its electronic vote collection system after receiving a mysterious threat to its computers. (Dec. 19), from USA Today

99.181.143.108 (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

See Iowa Republican caucuses, 2012 specifically. 99.19.43.221 (talk) 03:38, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
Iowa GOP Ups Protection Against Hacker Attack Wednesday, December 28, 2011 by Steffen Schmidt, IAFC Blogger on WNYC. 99.181.147.68 (talk) 08:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

resources[edit]

Stratfor#2011 Hacking 99.181.143.108 (talk) 04:37, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

More Questions About Motives Behind Stratfor Hack by NICOLE PERLROTH New York Times December 27, 2011, 6:31 PM
99.190.86.5 (talk) 06:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
From WSJ, 'Anonymous' Hackers Target U.S. Security Think Tank December 27, 2011 Associated Press. 09:48, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
Currently called Stratfor#2011 hacking incident — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.19.45.81 (talk) 12:04, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

(od) Here or there or somewhere? Finding the Cleanup Crew After a Messy Hack Attack by Nicole Perlroth published Nytimes.com December 29, 2011 and in-print on December 30, 2011, on page B1 of the New York edition; regarding computer forensics and Mandiant. 99.109.125.85 (talk) 00:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

The Stratfor hack is much more than file copies, and their website only came back online Jan 12, 2012. From http://thehackernews.com/2012/01/stratfor-back-online-after-hack-with.html Chief Executive George Friedman said in a message to Stratfor's subscribers: "Early in the afternoon of Dec. 24, I was informed that our website had been hacked again. The hackers published a triumphant note on our homepage saying that credit card information had been stolen, that a large amount of email had been taken, and that four of our servers had been effectively destroyed along with data and backups." As to the post declaring that Anonymous didn't do the Stratfor hack, who is to know who is Anonymous and who isn't. That is an important point to be stressed. (To me Anonymous is more like a wave packet than anything else I can think of to describe it.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArishiaNishi (talkcontribs) 18:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC) oops, forgot my sig ArishiaNishi (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

resource?[edit]

from People's Liberation Front disamb. page. 99.181.131.214 (talk) 00:35, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikinews resource[edit]

{{Wikinews|US government, music industry websites taken offline in web attack}} 99.35.14.75 (talk) 02:49, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Blackouts[edit]

Under the Operation Blackout header, it's stated that Google shut down every service except its search engine. Can anyone confirm this? I'm fairly certain this didn't happen (although the censored Google logo and informative pages on SOPA/PIPA did). Musicaljelly (talk) 09:37, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Why was Operation BART section removed?[edit]

In August 2011, in response to Bay Area Rapid Transit's shutdown of cell phone service in an attempt to disconnect protesters from assembling non-violently in response to a police shooting, Anonymous sent out a mass email/fax bomb to BART personnel and organized multiple mass physical protests at the network's Civic Center station.[1]

99.181.155.14 (talk) 03:13, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

YouTube porn day in May, 2009[edit]

Why no mention of it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.162.121.235 (talk) 10:10, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

miss padania[edit]

they hacked the site of Miss Padania — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.74.111.209 (talk) 14:20, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Arrests[edit]

Would it be alright to expand the article to include more details on each time the members of Anonymous, AntiSec and Luzsec are taken into custody? This news article would be a good start: http://www.firstpost.com/tech/anonymous-case-hacker-sabu-was-an-fbi-plant-for-months-236968.html FF3TerraAndLocke (talk) 06:22, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Unsubstantiated claims removed[edit]

I reverted recent edits by an anonymous user because they appear to be original research using sources that make no mention of Anonymous and one pastebin.com source which is itself a wholly unreliable source because anyone can create a pastebin file. The anonymous editor geolocates in Malaysia and has also added similar unsupported synthesis to Phobos-Grunt. -84user (talk) 15:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 08:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


Timeline of events involving AnonymousTimeline of events associated with Anonymous – Anonymous is reported to be involved, but does know the group is "involved"? An alternative title might use reported, etc ... 99.181.147.96 (talk) 03:48, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Support The occurrence of other groups claiming affiliation with Anonymous makes any claims of ours about "involvement" potentially dangerous. --BDD (talk) 19:47, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Declaration of Revolution[edit]

I've not heard of this organisation until a couple of days ago when I had an email purporting to be from them titled "Declaration of Revolution" and talking about an occupation of the UK Houses of Parliament and US Congress in December. If it is from them we need to add it to the timeline. Paul MacDermott (talk) 22:21, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

This article is getting long, suggest breaking into years?[edit]

Suggest starting with new page for this year, Timeline of events associated with Anonymous#2012. 99.109.127.232 (talk) 22:54, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

independence hall tea party hack[edit]

As far as I know, whoever posted the admin username and password of the independence hall tea party sites never identified themselves as a member of Anonymous.

The source given for this section of the article doesn't quote anyone encouraging people to "Fuck shit up", nor does it mention Anonymous; it does mention 4chan, but Anonymous and 4chan are not one and the same. Homurssui (talk) 02:56, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. I have removed that section as it was unsupported by the given cite. I would urge editors to properly follow WP:V and WP:RS. -84user (talk) 05:26, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Add?[edit]

99.181.139.217 (talk) 09:10, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Where? I know where you placed it, but where should it be placed, if anywhere?
Why? Why is reference different from all the used references? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:14, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Pages 421-431 of her book are a timeline (ISBN 978-0-316-21354-7) HachettBookGroup
Also see The Secret Lives of Dangerous Hackers; ‘We Are Anonymous’ by Parmy Olson May 31, 2012 NYT 99.181.146.141 (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Still, at best, external link quality, unless you use it source specific items in the timeline. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:16, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

(od) See Talk:Anonymous (group)#Add reference book. 99.109.124.90 (talk) 04:47, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Operation Israel[edit]

Can anyone add in the recent Anonymous attacks against Israeli government and military websites as part of the ongoing Gaza clashes?--RM (Be my friend) 08:48, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Academic Resources[edit]

I feel that there needs to be a push to incorporate a greater degree of academic resources (peer reviewed) into both the Timeline and (group) page. As it stands, most of the citations are newspaper articles which often provide contrasting and/or misinformed opinions. I have added Halupka & Star's (2011) article to the opening description while maintaining most of the original content. In this way, the page provides a greater exploration of academic content while continuing to highlight the perception of Anonymous as a hackivist community. MrOnionMaster (talk) 23:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Bias Article, that Seems to Paint the illegal Hackers as hero[edit]

This article is very Bias, and has ton of original research which is BIAS to Anonymous's view. This Article need a Non Neutral Point of View Tag ASAP.

The Article say "successfully hack a website or successfully defaced a websites' page". Successfully, in who's eyes.

the article states Anonymous actions as being justified, and take their side, then praises the illegal actions taken by the group, even racist actions.

This article need to be cleaned up, and in my honest opinion, remove. It's like a score board to the hacker group, and not all claim can be attributed to the group, tons of story of anonymous taking credit for thing they haven't even done.

I'm putting the NPOV Tag up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.36.3 (talk) 11:20, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

  1. ^ Poeter, Damon (2011-08-15). "Anonymous BART Protest Shuts Down Several Underground Stations | News & Opinion". PCMag.com. Retrieved 2011-08-30.