Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of convicted computer criminals/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by Matthewedwards 00:34, 30 May 2009.

List of convicted computer criminals

 * Nominator(s): Esemono (talk) 14:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because I'm curious if it will pass Esemono (talk) 14:07, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

— Chris!  c t 03:12, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment
 * Featured lists don't start with "This list..." anymore. See recently promoted FLs for an example of more engaging lead sentence.
 * fixed --Esemono (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Lead is still very small - please expand
 * Expanded -- Esemono (talk) 06:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Also sorting doesn't work correctly for some columns (I'll help you fix this, but that why peer review is helpful)
 * Thanks -- Esemono (talk) 06:16, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Penalty" column shouldn't be sorted in my opinion - since suspended sentence, psychiatric treatment, prison and probation are different and thus cannot be compared
 * Changed to not sortable -- Esemono (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Looking good, I will support — Chris!  c t 04:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)

Comments Matthewedwards : Chat  07:17, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Is this a complete list of convicted computer criminals? What about The Pirate Bay guys or the Isohunt guy? What about Shawn Fanning, Gary Glitter, Pete Townshend? Are there any notable people (with or without WP articles) arrested and convicted due to Operation Ore, Operation Avalanche or any of the other Kiddie porn stings? (Note that I'm not saying for sure they have been convicted; you'd need to check up on it, and any others to make sure they're not missing)
 * There will always be future computer criminals but:
 * Pirate Bay is under appeal
 * But they were convicted, or not? The page isn't "List of convicted computer criminals who have not appealed their conviction or had their appeal turned down" Matthewedwards : Chat
 * Pete Townshend was never charged with any crime and in an April 2007, an article in The Guardian stated that Townshend was "falsely accused of accessing child pornography".
 * OK. Matthewedwards : Chat
 * Shawn Fanning of napster fame was also never charged with any crime and napster still functions.
 * OK Matthewedwards : Chat
 * ISOHunt the company was never charged with any crime and is still running. So I doubt any of their members would be charged.
 * OK Matthewedwards : Chat
 * Operation Ore and Operation Avalanche netted lots of individuals but not really any notable ones. Also U.K investigative journalist Duncan Campbell wrote a series of articles criticizing police forensic procedures and trial evidence which basically prosecuted a large amount of innocent people who had their credit cards hacked.
 * So what? Does his criticism mean the convictions don't stand? If there are no notable ones, so be it, but just because someone complained, doesn't mean they automatically get discounted from the list. Matthewedwards : Chat
 * Yeah I see what your saying but the scope of the article doesn't include copyright infringement or child pornography. The article defines computer crime as criminal activity involving an information technology infrastructure, including illegal access (unauthorized access), illegal interception (by technical means of non-public transmissions of computer data to, from or within a computer system), data interference (unauthorized damaging, deletion, deterioration, alteration or suppression of computer data), systems interference (interfering with the functioning of a computer system by inputting, transmitting, damaging, deleting, deteriorating, altering or suppressing computer data), misuse of devices, forgery (ID theft), and electronic fraud. -- Esemono (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * But isn't it misleading? Computer criminals can be people charged and convicted of child pornographic crimes, and other non-hacking crimes. Matthewedwards : Chat
 * The scope of the article is defined in the lead. I just go by what the sources say, I didn't think original research was encouraged.... -- Esemono (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Convicted computer criminals or hackers are people who break into computers or computer networks." but not all people who break into computer or computer networks are convicted computer criminals.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "The subculture that has evolved around hackers is often referred to as the computer underground." By whom? When? Is this subculture notable enough to have an article? There should be a link to it. Could we get this statement referenced?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Computer crime is a relatively new crime." Relative to what? Will this statement still hold up in a year? Five years? Perhaps anchor it to a certain time with as of. Again, do you have a reference?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "often they have to write the laws after a crime has taken place" so technically, many may not have commited a crime because there was no law to say it was a crime?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Below is a list of computer criminals" Is there a way to avoid the article referencing itself?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not fixed; it still says "Below is a list of computer criminals with a conviction in a court of law:" Matthewedwards : Chat
 * I had changed it but then a more senior editor disagreed with you and changed it back -- Esemono (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Well that put me in my place! Even King Jimbo is no more senior editor than an unregistered IP. Still, it made me laugh! Articles referencing themselves is poor practice. We know there is a list below. We know they're computer criminals, and we know they're convicted. We know all this because that is what the article is about. Matthewedwards : Chat
 * Whatever you say man! I don't want to get involved in your senior editor power struggles. -- Esemono (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "From the earliest days of hacking criminal convictions have been hard to come by as in the beginning of the hacker subculture there was some type of honor ethic, a sort of honor among thieves." -- A bit long winded. Can this be broken down with some punctuation?
 * Still unresolved. Matthewedwards : Chat
 * How about now -- Esemono (talk) 22:37, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Hackers who felt this way broke past computer security for non-malicious reasons and did no damage, akin to breaking into a house and looking around. These types of hackers enjoy learning and working with computer systems, and by this experience gain a deeper understanding of electronic security. This would change as the computer industry matured and those with malicious intentions would emerge to exploit computer systems for their own personal profit." All requires sourcing
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:LAYOUT -- page is formatted incorrectly
 * Can you be more specific? -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A contents box for one real section isn't really necessary
 * There are two dabs and a few redirects that should be fixed
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There are a couple of punctuation errors. Could you find someone to copy edit the prose, including that in the "conviction" and "penalty" columns of the table? Matthewedwards : Chat  05:42, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Comment
 * How about Dutch Kournikova virus author Jan de Wit? He was convicted. Baldrick90 (talk) 21:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * He is in the list -- Esemono (talk) 04:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose until thorough copyedit is made per GeraldK's comments below. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

 Weak Oppose/ Review by  --
 * Lead
 * 'Convicted computer criminals or hackers are people who get caught and convicted of breaking into computers or computer networks.' -- Comma before and after 'or hackers'
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'People started to be convicted of computer crimes or hacking as early as 1983 as in the case of The 414s from the 414 area code in Milwaukee.' --> Convictions of computer crimes, or hacking, began as early as 1983 with the case of The 414s from the 414 area code in Milwaukee.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'In that case six teenagers broke into a number of high-profile computer systems, including ones at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and Security Pacific Bank.' -- Comma after 'In that case'
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'In the infancy of the hacker subculture criminal convictions were hard to come by because there was ethics, a sort of honor among thieves.' -- Comma after 'subculture'
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'As the computer industry matured this would change and those with malicious intentions, (black hats), would emerge to exploit computer systems for their own personal profit.' --> As the computer industry matured, individuals with malicious intentions (black hats) would emerge to exploit computer systems for their own personal profit.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'This is the case with Jeanson James Ancheta who created hundreds of zombie computers to do his bidding via giant Botnets.' --> This was the case with Jeanson James Ancheta, who created hundreds of zombie computers to do his bidding via giant Botnets.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead needs to summarize the list better, the lead right now just explains and goes into a lot of technical details but not much summary of the list itself. The lead should summarize the list itself, such as stating the first/most recent convicted criminals, describing statistics like who was the first individual to do such and such, what nationality has the most criminals, etc. I see that you have the first/most recent listed in the lead, but please clarify that more with dates.
 * Tried to expand-- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Images
 * 'Famous hackers Adrian Lamo (left) with contemporaries Kevin Mitnick (center) and Kevin Poulsen' -- Removed 'famous', in this case its a WP:POV.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'September 2005 image of Mark Abene who was convicted of a number of computer charges in the 1990s' -- Comma before 'who'
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Is there a need for 2 images in the lead? I think 1 should suffice because 2 leaves a lot of whitespace in the lead.
 * With expanded lead there is less white space-- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Computer criminals
 * 'Below is a list of computer criminals with a conviction in a court of law:' -- No need for this, as the reader is made aware about what the list is about in the lead.
 * Left align the dashes.
 * Because Abene had more than once conviction and sentencing date, the columns should reflect that as Conviction(s) and Sentencing date(s)
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Seek a copyedit of the penalty and conviction columns, they need a copyedit for tenses, grammar, and wording that is more encyclopedic.
 * References
 * Why is the FBI ref have 'pub' for the publisher? I'm guessing it was a typo?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref 35: The publisher is Sophos Plc
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * What makes 'livinginternet' a reliable source?
 * replaced -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The USA Today ref should be properly formatted and have USA Today as the work and Associated Press as the publisher.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref 22: Information week is the work and United Business Media, Inc. is the publisher.
 * fixed-- Esemono (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

-- T ru  c o   22:05, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I will support once I am ensured that the content in the table has received a copyedit for grammar and tenses.-- T ru  c o   20:30, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Oppose - there are still a great many inconsistencies in spelling and grammar throughout. Please in the future either have your lists copyedited or peer reviewed before bringing them to FLC. Specifically: Forty six months
 * Some of the entries under convictions and sentences have periods, some do not. I would look for a way to make them consistent, which would probably require rewording of a number of statments to make them either sentences with periods or sentence fragments without.
 * "One count of computer trespass and One count of computer conspiracy" - if this is a single sentence, the second use of 'one' should not be capitalized.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Pleaded guilty"... in multiple entries should be 'pled' if the article is using North American English spelling, if not it's fine. But repeated use of "Also plead guilty" is wrong either way because plead is present tense in both version, and the statements should be in past tense for consistency.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Two years three months imprisonment"... should have an 'and' between years and three.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "One year suspended sentence, he was put on a AUS $1,000" should use a semi-colon rather than a comma.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Eleven months in a Massachusetts juvenile detention facility[13] Although a search shows as of May 6, 2009" needs punctuation near the ref, and if it's a comma 'although' should not be capitalized.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Microsoft, LexisNexis and The New York Times" vs. "guilty to seven counts of mail, wire and computer fraud, money laundering, and obstruction of justice" - if you are going to use a serial comma, you must use it consistently throughout the article.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Forty six months" to Forty-six months.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Memorial Sloan- Kettering Cancer Center" to "Memorial Sloan-Kettering" and wikilink.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Do not introduce the list with, "Computer criminals with a conviction in a court of law:". Either get rid of it or give more information about what the criteria for inclusion in the list are. Right now, it effectively repeats the title of the article so is repetitive and not additive.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "Ancheta is the latest notable computer criminal to be arrested, convicted and then on May 9, 2006 sentenced." should be more like "Ancheta is the latest notable computer criminal to be arrested and convicted, his sentencing having taken place on May 9, 2006."
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "He is also the only person to be sentenced to more time in prison, with five years." more than what?
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "criminal convictions were hard to come by because there was ethics, a sort of honor among thieves" probably better with 'a code of ethics'.
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * "These white hat hackers broke past" vs. "They enjoy learning and working " one is present tense and one is past tense, though both are talking about the same topic. If you are talking about white hats at the time, it should all be past, if now, it should all be present, if both, there needs to be some transitions so that the differences in tensing make sense
 * fixed -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking the list of definitions of computer crime in the lead's first paragraph may work better as a bulleted list, as in Embedded list
 * Geraldk (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I won't fully review, as Geraldk has provided a substantial list of examples to work from, but the first sentence is a red flag: "Convicted computer criminals, or hackers, are people who get caught and convicted of breaking into computers or computer networks." "get caught" is much too awkward and sounds like something written by an elementary schooler. How about "...who are caught..."? Dabomb87 (talk) 23:40, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed. -- Esemono (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.