There is a piece that's going to be published in the August 3rd edition of New York Times Magazine dealing with trolls, /b/, and Mitchell Henderson. Anyone have any comments on this? - Giggy 08:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC) OK, I nominated it. Having done a fair bit of work cleaning this up, I'm thinking of nominating it for GA (and then move on to FA at some stage). Of course, we don't need to report everything that happens, so if you have a reason why you think we shouldn't report this, I'm happy to hear it. Jim88Argentina ( talk) 05:07, 27 July 2008 (UTC) The difference is that this was reported in verifiable reliable sources. I think this shouldnt even be mentioned in the article, it wasnt so important and things like that happen almost every day in 4chan. Personally, I think it's ridiculous to include the Google Trends fact.- Russoc4 ( talk) 16:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Google Hot Trends subversion? We can't include everything that happens in the article.
Users of 4chan attacked ashley tisdales website by spamming the forums with gore after she redid the rickroll song -Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.255.24.242 ( talk) 10:52, 26 July 2008 (UTC) I don't think this is any different from daily occurrences on 4chan. Isn't it right here? Talk:4chan/Archive_11#4Chan_is_down_as_of_July_20th.2C_2008- mboverload 21:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC) Please see above comment there is content in the article, there really isn't much left to say for now. It appears that whoever has taken it upon themselves to manage this page has lost sight of that, possibly because of miles of inane chatter, but no single person can be the judge of the relevancy of a whole discussion page! This is simply unacceptable by any standard. There were many earnest comments regarding proposed content on this locked topic. Wiping the talk page of a wikipedia article is un-Wikipedialike
0 kommentar(er)
