Jump to content

Talk:Kim Dotcom

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 78.34.142.61 (talk) at 03:32, 22 April 2012 (Weight). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconBiography: Science and Academia Start‑class
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group (assessed as Low-importance).


Modern Warfare 3

It has been has been added several times that Kim Dotcom got a high score in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. All of the sourcing seems to refer back to this YouTube video, which is not a reliable source.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:04, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Since he has a lot of money, and is well known for producing expensive video material about nothing (remember the KimVestor fraud?), he could pay to have a good-looking video made to push any point. The video doesn't prove that he really reached #1 in the game. 86.184.161.224 (talk) 22:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The claim is proven, but he is no longer #1 because of his time in jail. A claim which is true and sometimes referred as ironic (by the source listed) because it was one of the most pirated games. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:29, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Despite looking, all of the sourcing still seems to come back to the YouTube video, eg here. This should not go into the article without firmer sourcing.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:12, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kim Dotcom in 2012.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Kim Dotcom in 2012.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 4 March 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Kim Dotcom in 2012.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:42, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weight

Im sorry six foot six and only weighs 130kgs is ludicrous. Can we get an accurate weight or otherwise remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.81.18.30 (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

How is this ludicrous? I'm six foot five and I weigh 85 kg. --Nick 78.34.142.61 (talk)

Embezzlement figures

The share manipulation figures in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kim_Dotcom&oldid=481216893 don't add up. Bought for 375K, sold for 1.5E6, paid 280K then went bankrupt? Where did the rest of the money go? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.76.216.103 (talk) 10:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Megabox Conspiracy

Stating these two articles as my source, I believe that MegaBox should be included in or near the MegaUpload section.

MegaUpload Is Now Launching a Music Service Called MegaBox...

What Really Killed MegaUpload? Megabox, that's what... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Triaddraykin (talkcontribs) 06:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Megaupload#FORBES:_Is_This_The_Real_Reason_Why_MegaUpload_Was_Shut_Down.3F. The FBI investigation was spread over two years, and Megabox did not pick up any media coverage until December 2011. It seems unlikely that this was a major factor, as the Hollywood studios and TV companies were furious with Megaupload for a long time.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:58, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]