Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anonymous (Scientology)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was speedy redirected (by another user) to Project Chanology. Since these articles largely overlap, sourced information about the group already exists in the other article, and we just went through a massive AfD debate, I don't think going through that again is fruitful. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 14:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous (Scientology)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article purports to document the exploits of a valiant collective of hackers who wage DDOS attacks against Scientology websites. A skeptical review of the article's content and given references reveals speculation based on unverifiable sources and anti-Scientology soapboxing. In reality what we have here is a sampling of bored kids from various 4chan-like boards seeking attention for petty campaigns and misrepresenting news reports as evidence of their "full scale war over the interwebs". These claims are not notable in the real world. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 22:18, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I will succeed to your claims of having some information that is based on speculation and shall remove it.

I did not mean to, and do not attempt to, create anti-Scientology soapboxing. I am trying to create a neutral view of this group so others of whom are curious may see the facts and make their own, intelligent, decision. Seeing as I myself turned to Wikipedia for answers on "Who are these people" in a fair, informative manner. I was shocked and surprised to find nothing! Hence why I am attempting to create this page. I am no more than a beginner at Wikipedia and I do not seek to become an author of Wikipedia pages. With that in mind, please forgive my objective point of view as I do not believe I even noticed it. Kenji000 (talk) 22:30, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect for now to Project Chanology, which the author obviously didn't find when searching. There's precious little that can be said about "Anonymous" that isn't already in that article. --Dhartung | Talk 22:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * In all fairness, I was also oblivious. Given that Articles for deletion/Project Chanology was closed yesterday, this nomination is rendered moot. Thanks for the clue, Dhartung. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 00:17, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's ironic that it's rendered moot when it's discussing "Anonymous"...--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 17:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that we should re-convine on 6-12 to create a page in regards to the entity group known as "Anonymous", until then. I will not add or remove anything from the page that already exists, or if so wished remove it until 6-12 and start over then. Kenji000 (talk) 22:51, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Project Chanology, any relevant information not already there that's here can be merged. Both articles cover the same topic.-h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 11:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I feel that this AfD is too soon regarding Anonymous' future actions, largely stemming that in Anonymous' 2nd YouTube Video "Call to Action" foretold of a major event occurring on February 10th, which has yet to occur. I suggest we reconvene in 6-12 months time to reconsider the notability of the article. Cheers. Zidel333 (talk) 17:01, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.