Talk:List of material published by WikiLeaks
.svg){kind=small} | This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Material from List of material published by WikiLeaks was split to WikiLeaks on 9 December 2010. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
Google insights
editWhy are there all the mentions and citations of google insights? What point dont I see? Softlemonades (talk) 03:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
Merger proposal
edit
Formal request has been received to merge: Camp Delta Standard Operating Procedures into List of material published by WikiLeaks; dated: September 2022. Proposer's Rationale: Notability was flagged in July and the significance is unclear, there are only two sources and the second just calls it "out of date", ~Softlemonades. Discuss here. GenQuest "scribble" 04:49, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- Most of its already listed at the differently named and harder to find Guantanamo Bay procedures section of the page Softlemonades (talk) 13:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- This was done, although the source page could not be accessed by me to create the redirect. GenQuest "scribble" 18:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
Violation of policy
editDoesn't linking to WikiLeaks violate our policies? We are not allowed to link to any website known to host copyright violations or stolen documents, and linking the an archived copy doesn't help the situation. That's why the Steele dossier article does not link directly to the website that hosts the dossier. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 21:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I understood WP:RSP#WikiLeaks meaning we could use it for ABOUTSELF and when discussed by an RS, but not if that page violated copyright. I wont argue with consensus, but thats what I thought it meant Softlemonades (talk) 23:10, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
- I fear my comment wasn't very clear. Yes, ABOUTSELF allows linking to the main index page and About page, but WikiLeaks hosts lots of illegally obtained content, and I believe we are not allowed to link to such URLs. This list links to many such pages. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 23:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Kaupthing Bank: "...are being investigated"
editKaupthing Bank
WikiLeaks made available an internal document[80][better source needed] from Kaupthing Bank from just prior to the collapse of Iceland's banking sector, which led to the 2008–2012 Icelandic financial crisis. The document shows that suspiciously large sums of money were loaned to various owners of the bank, and large debts written off. Kaupthing's lawyers have threatened WikiLeaks with legal action, citing banking privacy laws. The leak has caused an uproar in Iceland.[81]
Criminal charges relating to the multibillion-euro loans to Exista and other major shareholders are being investigated. The bank is seeking to recover loans taken out by former bank employees before its collapse.[82]
I've never heard of this, until reading it here just now. First, the date of the Wikileaks release should be included, and also, given that it's 2024, the tense of this statement should be fixed, as I assume whatever legal issues there may have been, have been resolved by now. Also some mention of that legal resolution, such as "no one important went to prison" should be included, in order to improve the Article, etc....