Talk:The Pirate Bay

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article The Pirate Bay was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. 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
Date Process Result
October 1, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
April 5, 2010 Peer review Reviewed
May 4, 2010 Good article reassessment Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article


Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Information.svg To view an answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.

Deletion of Carl Lundström from infobox[edit]

The deletion of Lundström from the infobox contradicts the body of the article which states: "...Piratbyrån spokesman Tobias Andersson acknowledged that "without Lundström's support, Pirate Bay would not have been able to start." He was also convicted along with the others. Certainly he was as much as a creator as Sunde who claimed to only be a spokesman. This is long-standing consensus and should not be deleted without discussion. Objective3000 (talk) 16:36, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

The website infobox section he's named in is "Created by". The court case didn't consider who created the site: it was about aiding and abetting in copyright infringement. The site already existed (2003-2004) before Lundström got involved. The court judgment does not mention Andersson's claim.
Looking at the tasks they had, the prosecutor's section of the judgment says that Sunde "entered the picture for the purpose of designing the new website", "was also asked to design the search function", "involved in the advertising sales operation".
Likewise of Lundström, it says that he "discussed an international launch of the website" in 2005, "supply additional computers and operating capital, and to continue to provide Internet access", "was in a position of influence with respect to the future of the filesharing service", "is the host owner/external partner who would own a certain proportion of the newly-formed company", "involved himself in the actual operation by making proposals for the development of new services".
Lundström should be removed from the "Created by" section of the infobox. 2001:BC8:4400:2100:0:0:1D:D03 (talk) 20:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
You are using a very narrow definition of created. According to your definition, Sunde shouldn’t be in the infobox. Indeed, perhaps all three would be removed as Piratbyrån created the site a year before they were involved. A Piratbyrån spokesman said Lundström was a part of the start. Since, Lundström funded the project, is the largest shareholder, and was convicted with the others; it makes sense to include him as one of the principles. Objective3000 (talk) 21:33, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Creating is very different from operating or being responsible of. Best Buy didn't create Napster despite the considerable investment. Steve Ballmer didn't create Microsoft despite running the company for over a decade. Sunde's website creation tasks however should certainly put him as a creator in the infobox. If the infobox field in question was about something else, such as "Principles", you might have a point. 2001:BC8:4400:2100:0:0:1D:D03 (talk) 22:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Where is your RS that states Sunde was an author of the site? He denied this himself under oath. The site was created by Piratbyrån. That is well established. The people in that list were not creators under the definition that you wish to use. What is your purpose in removing a person that the actual creators state was at the start and that, if not for him, the site may not have ever existed? This sounds like cleansing the article of an unpopular name. We don't do that. Objective3000 (talk) 00:27, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

One official link[edit]

While I might no recall all the past discussions and the level of consensus on the various subtopics, we've agreed to only have one official link per NOT and EL. If someone wants to attempt to change that consensus, please consider reviewing all the past discussions, summarize the relevant agreements, and give a case for why we should reconsider those agreements. --Ronz (talk) 15:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The only official link as of August 2017 is thepiratebay.org. There are approximately half a zillion unofficial mirrors, but these are ruled out by WP:EL. They usually aren't up to date or accurate versions of the official site, and may contain malware, phishing scams etc.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 07:43, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Please update the existing whitelisting if there is reasonable evidence for the official site. Many mirrors would be up for blacklisting (on meta if they contain malware, are phishing, etc.). --Dirk Beetstra T C 07:51, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
Ah sorry this is all my fault -- I included the official .onion link (not mirror, actual official) however, as Ronz pointed out, WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. --Nanite (talk) 09:16, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

information that should be added to the infobox[edit]

the most reliable access to the pirate bay is through the tor network should be included in the infobox, at the very beginning of this page because the pirate bay has been under attack from governments and hackers, there should be a link to a reliable functional pirate bay browser that supports the organization's mission. tor supports the pirate bay's mission, and should be included inside the infobox, not at the end of the article

torproject.org Hmazuji (talk) 12:54, 6 October 2017 (UTC) hmazuji Oct 06, 2017

This has been discussed at length and the consensus is against this, in line with Wikipedia guidelines. Objective3000 (talk) 13:13, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
Agreed. Also, links to .onion sites are generally discouraged on Wikipedia, and sometimes prohibited. For most practical purposes, the official link to the site is thepiratebay.org. It isn't up to Wikipedia to tell people how to get around government imposed blocking, although they can soon find out how to do this if they're sufficiently interested.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:25, 6 October 2017 (UTC)