Template:Did you know nominations/2012 Yahoo! Voice hack

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:17, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Per below review

2012 Yahoo! Voice hack

(

)

... that the 2012 Yahoo! Voices hack (logo pictured) leaked out approximately 4.5 lakhs of username and passwords?

Created/expanded by Dipankan001 (talk). Nominated by Vibhijain (talk) at 09:25, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

- ALT 1 ... that the 2012 Yahoo! Voices hack leaked out approximately 4.5 lakhs of username and passwords?

What's a lac? The logo can't be used for a DYK. Secretlondon (talk) 15:39, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, it was a typo. Fixed. Dipankan ^{(Have a chat?)} 15:44, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm interested in the Indian flavour of using lakh as a unit of measurement. Indian English hooks on the front page are cool, we just need to link it to lakh as most readers won't know what it is. The structure needs sorting out slightly - the first para should be a WP:LEDE. tapscape.com reference is missing a link. The CS monitor reference doesn't use lakh? Secretlondon (talk) 18:07, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think we should use lakhs in the hook or the article - the hack did not occur in India as far as I can see, and it did not involve an Indian company. The use of lakhs in the article seems to be purely an artifact of the author using a few Indian sources to write the article - most of the sources do not use Indian terminology at all, and since it isn't an Indian story I don't think the use of specifically Indian terminology is appropriate. It certainly isn't a good idea from the point of view of being comprehensible internationally. Unless those issues are sorted out, I'm afraid I'm going to have to oppose this nomination. Prioryman (talk) 22:06, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

- - ALT 2 ... that the 2012 Yahoo! Voices hack leaked out approximately 4.5 lacs of username and passwords?

Consider on the above part? Dipankan ^{(Have a chat?)} 11:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

That's worse. You can't use lac without explaining what it is (it's not known here). The debate is whether it is included at all, or whether the number of passwords leaked is expressed differently. Secretlondon (talk) 19:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Having looked at this further, I don't think this article can be accepted. There are systematic problems with it. For instance, I've just found that many of the titles of the source articles have been changed - e.g. "Yahoo! hack steals 4.5 lacs of usernames and passwords, is you'rs hacked?" instead of the real title of "Yahoo hack steals 400,000 passwords. Is yours on the list?" [1], "Yahoo! Voice hacked: 4.5 lakh passwords in the net" instead of "Yahoo hacked: 4.5 lakh passwords reportedly posted online". That's not just inaccuracy, that's falsification of the sources. Quite honestly, I think this article needs to be reviewed and possibly rewritten from top to bottom - if even the source titles have been misrepresented, there's good reason to believe that other things are wrong too. There are just too many warning signals for me here and I don't think an article with this level of systemic inaccuracy meets DYK standards. Prioryman (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2012 (UTC)