Talk:Cyberwarfare in the United States

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 May 2021 and 31 July 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Jbuchanan 1.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Dcollins39.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

potential Further Reading

 * January 2012 issue of Popular Mechanics by Adam Price (page 52 to 57).  99.181.132.91 (talk) 04:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

rename, article isn't about "in"
Cyberwarfare in the United States → Cyberwarfare by the United States suggestion.

99.181.134.62 (talk) 05:59, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Reverse. United States policy for Cyberwarfare and include this link:

http://www.mitchellrepublic.com/event/article/id/72540/group/homepage/


 * Do I have a second? Hcobb (talk) 14:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I second this view, but the article is inherently NPOV. The article needs extensive revision or deletion. --Zeamays (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

If anyone considers a future renaming, I suggest "Cyberwarfare and the United States" to neatly encompass the entirety of the subject matter. Articles specific to other nations could follow the same naming convention. Pdxuser (talk) 08:37, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

NPOV
The article's first paragraph defines it as being about offensive warfare by the US Government, which is completely different from the meaning of the title of the article. I recommend either extensive revision or deletion. Renaming it would not solve the problem because the included material is so one-sided. --Zeamays (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The definition statement (paragraph 1) is not supported by the cited reference, which is maliciously misinterpreted.|American Forces Press Service: Lynn Explains the U.S Cybersecurity Strategy --Zeamays (talk) 15:05, 14 June 2014 (UTC)


 * I would agree that the opening paragraph and title have serious problems. The first paragraph is very one sided and lacks references. It also does not contribute to the overall article. Digiduck (talk) 05:43, 12 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The article and intro currently discuss cyberwarfare both by and against the United States. Is the NPOV dispute therefore resolved? Pdxuser (talk) 08:40, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Looks fine to me. Removed. Snori (talk) 08:02, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Cyberwarfare in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150907181125/http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SMA/ispab/documents/DOD-Strategy-for-Operating-in-Cyberspace.pdf to http://csrc.nist.gov/groups/SMA/ispab/documents/DOD-Strategy-for-Operating-in-Cyberspace.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 16:35, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Cyberwarfare in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110529013300/http://www.defense.gov//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=63635 to http://www.defense.gov/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110529013300/http://www.defense.gov//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=63635 to http://www.defense.gov/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:35, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Good article, some critiques
Overall I feel like this is a good, mostly non-bias article. It presented mostly events/facts with very little opinionated content, but there are some issues with it.

- All facts presented in the first half of the article are properly cited, but in the "Timeline" section there are some non-cited facts.This section goes through notable events in recent history involving the US's role in cyberwarefare. There are a couple of events without a citation, and there are many with a possibly bias/non reliable source. For example the fourth event is cited with a Washington Post article and is about an attack on a US military base in the Middle East.Having only the American point of view on such a foreign attack will likely not show the full picture. - This article is mostly neutral, there isn't anything that seems heavily biased but there are parts that don't seem to have both sides equally represented. There are many reference to cyber attacks between two nations that do not have sources from both sides. There is naturally going to be a struggle finding good sources from a foreign country that may not have the same freedom of press that we do, especially when it comes to military action, but I would have liked to see more non-US based citations.

This article does a good job of presenting US cyberwarefare policy and many important events in a mostly non-bias way.

Dcollins39 (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cyberwarfare in the United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100905140740/http://www.stratcom.mil/factsheets/cc to http://www.stratcom.mil/factsheets/cc/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100413135334/http://www.ftmeade.army.mil/pages/news/stories/2010/jan/cyber.html to http://www.ftmeade.army.mil/pages/news/stories/2010/jan/cyber.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:37, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

Lede reads like a term-paper essay
I think the lede needs to more sharply define the topic, and the title should more specifically reflect the defined topic. SPECIFICO talk  15:28, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Rename title
Had some discussion on Cyberwarfare by Russia about renaming that article to be in line with the title of this one, partial consensus there was to change this article's title to match, which would be Cyberwarfare by the United States. Thoughts? Gabriel syme (talk) 16:11, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

essay-like
Lead section has an essay-like tone to it. Don't think its encyclopedic. Exceller88 (talk) 16:30, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Added Original Research tag
Hello, fellow Wikipedians! I added the Original Research tag as per WP:OR, and I would remove it myself but for the reason(s) mentioned in my edit summaries (permalinks to the revisions are here and here), I don't feel comfortable doing it myself. The reasons for the tagging is also explained in the summary. Have a great day! Thanks, KnowledgeablePersona (talk) 04:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Why is this called Cyberwarfare "in" the United States?
But the other similar articles use "by", i.e. Cyberwarfare by Russia, Cyberwarfare by France, Cyberwarfare by China, and Cyberwarfare by India. There's also another odd one, Cyberwarfare and Iran. I propose this discrepancy be addressed. Philomathes2357 (talk) 07:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)