Talk:Weev/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

This individual appears to no longer be guarding his identity. (cf. http://www.google.com/profiles/gluttony). Is there a reason not to include his name, now? Blowfish (talk) 05:47, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Arrest

http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-20007827-245.html Unomi (talk) 03:17, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I mentioned the raid on his house in the article, but I didn't know if the drug arrest really merited a mention.Qrsdogg (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

209.11.184.1 (talk) of course it does! if you leave out the drug offense then a lot more impressionable young people might believe the fool things that come out of this guy's mouth —Preceding undated comment added 19:33, 7 July 2010 (UTC).

What would drugs have to do with what they believe? It seems rather obvious from his videos that he does drugs-- His arrest wouldn't change people's minds. An oddly foolish and non-neutral comment. But regardless, the drug arrest is very relevant to his profile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.223.222.30 (talk) 19:38, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Freetoseetheworld, 16 June 2010

{{editsemiprotected}}

In order to de-orphan the page, this article should be linked to Encyclopedia Dramatica, where Weev is one of the original, and senior, moderators.

Freetoseetheworld (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Not done: You need to be more specific on what needs to be changed. The page can't be magically linked to Encyclopedia Dramatica as it's not referenced anywhere in the article. If you have a reliable source stating he is a a moderator etc then it could be added. SpigotMap 12:29, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Uhh, it's pretty obvious how to find a reliable source, the site itself. It has a generated list of moderators, ffs. And if it's not referenced anywhere, why don't you fix that instead of complaining? He gives you a sentence to use in his request "Weev is one of the original, and senior, moderators", I'm pretty sure you can come up with something from that. LiteralKa (talk) 03:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

No it can't magically be linked to the Encyclopedia Dramatica article, but it can be linked by bracketing the words with [[ and ]]. If you need any more help with Mediawiki mark-up just shoot me a message with the Special:EmailUser function provided you can find it. Remember, you can't edit Wikipedia with magic.--Zaiger (talk) 05:16, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

How about we create section about Goatse Security at AT&T#Criticism_and_controversies? That would be nice. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 14:00, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Is the fact that he's one of the top people at ED notable enough for inclusion in his Wikipedia article?-Schnurrbart (talk) 02:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Why do so many people have a petty and vindictive attitude towards ED? Has it hurt your feelings? Be bigger than that. Anyway, I think anybody reading this article will probably know about ED, so the link is not really important. I think it should be there, definitely, and if it were any other website (IE one that doesn't take the piss out of the humorless aspects of Wikipedia) I don't think the link would be contested. Remember, these are kids we're talking about. In particular, one very smart kid who's said some way-out stuff about Jews while tripping, and now he's in serious danger because of bullshit possession charges. He has a drug problem - should he be thrown away like garbage? This kid actually did a hell of a favor for Ipad users, exposing a flaw that could've led to widespread identity theft. Make peace with ED (or at least accept that they're smart angry kids fed up with bullshit on the internet and the suffocating PC culture they were raised in). FREE WEEV !! Magmagoblin2 (talk) 03:20, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how weev's role in ED is relevant to this article. He's notable for the Amazon incident and the AT&T/Apple incident and has received a lot of media attention because of these things, not because of ED. As far as I know, the only ED connection that has been reported in the media is his friendship with Girlvinyl in the NY Times article. Someone could try to incorporate that connection into the aritcle but IMO mentioning weev's connection to ED seems more like trivia than something relevant about him that should be included in this article.-Schnurrbart (talk) 01:58, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

he is one of the origional and most senior admins at a large website that takes the piss out of wikipedia and sees it as some sort of MMO (http://encyclopedia dramatica.com/Wikipedia) and has his own religion, is that not enough? EDs new user (talk) 10:02, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes

This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Wikipedia:Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Wikipedia:Pending changes/Queue are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

Move article to real name

Since the subject's real name is known at this point, I suggest this article be renamed, and leave Weev as a redirect. 166.205.138.89 (talk) 14:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia has a common names policy. Weev is the common name. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:55, 7 July 2010‎

And, considering your irresponsible (and, of course, reverted) edit at Eddie Money, you might want to read up on how we do things here before offering us advice. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 07:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

"Hacker"?

"is the pseudonym of a American grey hat[1] hacker" -- shouldn't that read "is the pseudonym of an American script kiddie"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.11.184.1 (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Only if there's a source for the "script kiddie" claim. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 17:13, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

what's the source for the "hacker" claim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.130.197 (talk) 03:42, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

http://www.zdnetasia.com/feds-still-questioning-at-t-ipad-site-hackers-62202085.htm ; http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/06/16/auernheimer_arrested/ riffic (talk) 05:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Aha, so the sending of death threats and publishing of social security numbers is grey hat now. Fascinating. 77.101.47.254 (talk) 09:12, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

What? Are you actually afraid of him following through on them? Which is it? Is he dangerous, or incompetent? He can't be both. Pick one. - Yurtpoh (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I think it is silly and incompatible with an encyclopedia to call him "gray hat hacker", even citing (silly) sources. There is a gray cloud blurring the meaning of non-objective terms like that black/gray/white hat misclassification. 189.12.27.108 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:47, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

I agree, but if this article is going to list one of them, it might as well be the one they used in the source that has been cited. - Yurtpoh (talk) 20:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Who?

As in, this seems more like a vanity article of a person who hasn't done anything of noteworthy importance. Creamocheez (talk) 22:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

It'd also be better if the article was headed under his real name rather than his internet pseudonym. Creamocheez (talk) 22:22, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

You might want to review Wikipedia's definitions of Notability, Vanity, and Real names. As it is, I think the article abides by these guidelines. Qrsdogg (talk) 01:49, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Jewish?

Please make sure you review the categorization policies (WP:BLPCAT and Wikipedia:Categorization/Ethnicity, gender, religion and sexuality) before adding or removing information referring to the subject as a Jew or a Jewish–American. The policy says that this type of categorization "should not be used unless the subject has publicly self-identified" with the label–so a citation is really needed here. I didn't think that he has described himself as a Jew, but perhaps someone more familiar with his writings could comment further. Qrsdogg (talk) 21:50, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

This reference was removed in some series of edits:http://security.goatse.fr/hypocrites-and-pharisees "Take a look at my last name, 'Auernheimer'. Think about the likely origins of this name for a second. Even a quick Google reveals its origins." SchmuckyTheCat (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:08, 4 February 2011‎

'Auernheimer' is a German name. As with many German names, it might or might not be Jewish.---Dagme (talk) 03:49, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Let's note that in his writings, Auernheimer often identifies his religious views as Christian, and has stated that he models his personal behavior on that of Jesus. This is a tangly issue; see the Jews for Jesus article to note some controversies involved: Jews for Jesus defines "Jewish" in terms of parentage and as a birthright, regardless of religious belief. The identification of Jews for Jesus as a Jewish organization is overwhelmingly rejected by Jewish religious denominations and secular Jewish groups due to the Christian beliefs of its members. This article appears to side with the sentiment held by Jewish organizations, the Israeli state, and others, that people of Jewish ethnic heritage who hold Christian religious views are, in fact, not Jewish. Obviously this is problematic for a number of reasons -- that is, why should someone of Jewish ethnic heritage who converts to Christianity be so strongly rejected by the Jewish community, at the same time that atheists of Jewish descent are nearly always still considered Jews, and even conversion to Tibetan Buddhism does not result in rejection of one's Jewish identity by other Jews? But regardless of these inconsistencies, Auernheimer should not be listed here as a Jew at present time, especially if he has not overtly expressed self-identification as such. Adlerschloß (talk) 02:24, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

I tend to agree, having a "Jewish" last name doesn't necessarily indicate any connection to Jewish culture or faith–just that he likely had a Jewish ancestor. Although given the size of our Who is a Jew? article there are a lot of different perspectives on this. Qrsdogg (talk) 03:55, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

He says he has "Jewish ancestors" to Adrien Chen of Gawker: http://gawker.com/5962159/the-internets-best-terrible-person-goes-to-jail-can-a-reviled-master-troll-become-a-geek-hero so I think the reference is good to go back in. Solntsa90 (talk) 20:32, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

He does NOT claim to have Jewish ancestry. This was a misunderstanding on the part of Gawker. See this link, for instance, which provides clarification:

http://renegadetribune.com/gavin-mcinnes-and-weev-on-the-jewish-question-and-cuckservatives/

At the least, his denial of Jewish ancestry should be included in the article, with the reasons why. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:861A:9C00:F045:DA7:FEB2:8CE4 (talk) 02:52, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Why?

Why would this site waste time on this childish troll? He's done nothing but bad things, and we celebrate this? Give him a page for being a dick? Standards have fallen around here apparently. KProvance (talk) 06:20, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT please. riffic (talk) 11:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Provance, if you believe this article doesn't deserve to be on this Wiki, find a policy or guideline that says it shouldn't (I'd go with feeding trolls), and then AFD it. Warning: That will be controversial Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 16:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

It's not because he got it for being a dick, he got it for being a notable hacker involved with the iPad debacle. The same debacle that has tons of new reports concerning it. --♣thayora♣ 19:33, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

So you say not to feed the trolls, then you say you don't like him? I've been bullied my entire life. That's one hell of an opinion there, especially considering how much of an influence he had on the GNAA, and how much of an influence the GNAA has had on The Internet. They are not as anti-semetic as they seem, but guess who owns all the money? Certainly not the "Gay Nigger Association" or "The Trolls". If you knew Weevil personally, you would probably love the guy. Even A. Hitler has a page, doesn't he? I apologize for rambling on. Much of the good in Weev or the GNAA may not be remembered due to personal bias and past abuse/vandalism to wiki pages by other anonymous peoples who do not care for your hidden biases or opinions. --Thirteenz ex (talk) 09:11, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

"That's one hell of an opinion there, especially considering how much of an influence he had on the GNAA, and how much of an influence the GNAA has had on The Internet." GNAA had an influence on a tiny little subculture, consisting of fans of GNAA. It is not significant to anyone else. "They are not as anti-semetic as they seem, but guess who owns all the money?" So basically, you're arguing that Weev hates Jews only a little, but Jews have money so poor Weev is being unfairly demonized. I find your argument less than compelling.Rotwang Daedalus (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

No, you're making some large assumptions. I'm pretty sure that he doesn't actually hate Jewish people at all, and that he says anti-Semitic stuff like that just to get people worked up. That's why he's called an "internet troll." And the reason "poor Weev" is being unfairly demonized is because he's a computer hacker, and most people are afraid of things they don't understand... like computer software and security. - Yurtpoh (talk) 21:03, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, let's also delete the articles on Hitler and Pol Pot because they did bad things. 86.155.226.124 (talk) 19:58, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

charges have been filed now.

charges have been filed, its in reuters. is it considered acceptable to edit your own wikipedia article if shit is outdated? --Weev 4real (talk) 20:48, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

• also, i do not own that "prison blog". can someone please remove the link to it? --Weev 4real (talk) 20:50, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
• alright, im going to go ahead and edit my own article. i took the liberty of reading over WP:COI and WP:Autobiography. i am going to make purely factual and cited edits of facts of circumstances and corresponding dates and times. i hope this is noncontroversial. --Weev 4real (talk) 22:07, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it's fine. In the future you might find posting on WP:COIN will get a faster response. Gigs (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

The Verge profile

http://www.theverge.com/2013/9/12/4693710/the-end-of-kindness-weev-and-the-cult-of-the-angry-young-man has more detail on his attacks against Kathy Sierra than I've seen published so far. It needs to be in the article. 64.134.235.244 (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

needs more info about the aspects that are actually relevant

The article omits discussion of the things that are most notable about the ATT incident. Namely, the notable aspect was that the unauthorized access involved changing characters in a url and nothing more. If the issue had been a real/advanced intrusion there never would have been the coverage or the folk hero-esque drama. Considering this, the article as is is clearly deficient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.176.57.146 (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Bail Conditions

What are Auernheimer's bail conditions? I had thought that such would be a matter of public record, but I can't find any citations. For that matter, I am not a lawyer. kencf0618 (talk) 06:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

He's free nigger. - Nigger — Preceding undated comment added 11:15, 14 April 2014

Continued Criminal Activity

Shortly after being released from prison weev logged in to various irc chatrooms including irc.gnaa.eu.#GNAA, and #ED and continued his hacking, trolling and anti-semitic rants while advocating violence,mass murder, drug use, bestial relations with young horses and the overthrow of the USA government. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.194.168.31 (talk) 16:21, 30 June 2014‎

Your sources cited say nothing about continued criminal activity. I only see evidence of dark humor. Do you not understand dark humor? - Yurtpoh (talk) 21:13, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

References

White supremacist

White supremacists never call themselves white supremacists. They call themselves "white nationalists." Since that is a POV description, the article should state that he is a white supremacist because that's what the reliable source says. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.115.21.223 (talk) 09:05, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Having read the sources, I agree. The terms used are "neo-Nazi", and "white supremacist". "White nationalist" is not used anywhere. Changing article accordingly. --Ashenai (talk) 10:19, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Who is this?

Never heard of this guy Weev so I'm skimming through and I read "In 2008 The New York Times reported that Auernheimer claimed responsibility for posting a false account of Kathy Sierra's career in 2007[59]" I have no idea who Kathy Sierra is either. I shouldn't have to follow another link, it should have some identification of who she is, such as actress, author, dog walker, whatever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Punstress (talk • contribs) 20:30, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Residence?

Some IP just changed the residence. I have no idea if it's accurate or not. Stoodpointt (talk) 06:57, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

reverted paragraph

the revert I just did got shorted by a mishap, so the reasoning just reads "BLP". I removed that paragraph because it contained entirely unsourced claims, in my opinion a glaring BLP problem. If you plan to reintroduce them, please provide reliable sources. Thx. Wefa (talk) 01:03, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

@Wefa: I cited them. Was easy; don't be so lazy next time and instead fix it yourself. -- dsprc ^[talk] 15:47, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Is coeliac disease relevant?

There is a heading and one sentence at the end of this article, that seems to add nothing to the content or to the reader of an encyclopaedia's set of useful knowledge. Does anyone, except the subject and his mother/father/current partner/caregiver, care that he has coeliac disease? Does it add to the world's sum of knowledge? Ambiguosity (talk) 15:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Ambiguosity, that information was obviously irrelevant and inappropriate, and I removed it. A respectable encyclopedia does not list people's diseases without reason. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:46, 17 September 2016 (UTC)