Talk:"Anonymous" plans to protest Church of Scientology on February 10

Wrong

Anonymous was not founded to retaliate against scientology censorship, that information is innaccurate —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.137.9 (talk) 00:49, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Quite right, thanks for the correction, which was quickly rectified. Cirt 00:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

OR

Generally refers to material in the article gleaned from the popular YouTube videos. Cirt 00:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

New video?

This was added to the article without a source, so I removed it pending a source:

In response to Bunker's video, and once again in a computer generated voice, Anonymous has released another video detailing a set of rules which it expects to see followed at its organized protests. These rules serve to prevent violent and illegal action against the Church of Scientology, and to protect the identity and safety of the protesters. Mark Bunker is acknowledged in the most recent video.

What is the source for this? Cirt 03:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Also, this video is the same as the widely reported on "Message To Scientology", and was cited by CNET News. Was this new other vid cited anywhere? Cirt 04:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not the same at all. The YouTube user Church0fScientology has only 2 videos, both considered the "official" Anonymous messages to the public, press etc. Fallen-Griever 07:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, that's what I thought - I left a message for the user that added this above info w/out a source though, FYI that's Rekov (talk · contribs). So far, no response. Cirt 07:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Rekov (talk · contribs) got back to me:

Here is the link to the video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=LvV9xCv6K_k

Feel free to add it back to the article. Rekov 13:43, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I would have to agree with Fallen-Griever (talk · contribs), this particular video does not come from the same source as the other 2 that have been widely cited in the media - so I'd tend to leave it at what we've got currently in the article. Cirt 17:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

OR re site access, again

www.scientology.org is not loading for me, I'm getting: "The server at scientology.org is taking too long to respond." - Can anyone else verify this? (as of this timestamp) Cirt 10:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Loaded for me as of now. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 10:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hrm, still not getting anything at all, oh well. As of yet no recent sources have reported that it's currently still having problems, so I'll wait to see if they do. Cirt 10:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The Scientology website has actually been "down" for a long time. Prolexic is simply hosting the pages from a cache, giving the appearance that the page is working. In actuality, if you attempt to do anything other than interact with the site, such as search, the site commonly fails. At least, it does for me. Also, Anonymous made a 4th wave of DDoS attacks last night, although that wouldn't respond the problem at the timestamp. Fallen-Griever 14:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Past Jan 30

It's now past January 30, 2008. Thus, there will be no more updates to this article. Cirt 08:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Re major changes to the article by Simeon (talk · contribs) - let us please avoid any more changes to the article - it is way past January 29, 2008 - when the article was published, and let's just leave it and let the article reflect how it was at that point in time please. Cirt 18:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I think this is a Really Stupid Policy (TM) and have argued against it in the past .. when at least the story would be 'protected' against edits, thus saving naiive users the trouble of wasting hours of their time. Really I regret visiting this site again now. -- Simeon 03:53, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh forget it -- 61.68.161.212 04:17, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You know, while I would agree to not update any of the contents of the article, I would think a link to w:Project Chanology would be appropriate, either in the article itself or with the addition of a Wikipedia-box. Confusing Manifestation (Say hi!|Stalk me!) 05:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a minor enough edit, and a helpful suggestion at that. Done, thanks. Cirt 06:05, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous' guide to protest

They made a video of 22 rules for the protest on YouTube. Interesting...if to be "peaceful" they should not need rules. Also...they tell the protesters to "cover your face" with "scarves, sunglasses and hats"...no masks. DragonFire1024 (Talk to the Dragon) 19:20, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

You don't understand protesting, do you? Do some research on Scientology and their methods of intimidation etc. against protestors. Look into the XenuTV guy and what he told Anonymous to do, a lot of the rules come from him. Etc. Fallen-Griever 14:04, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Glad to see they are moving towards Gandhi-tech. Cirt 19:25, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The rules are there for the protection of other anonymous from scientology's handlers aparently, and from CoS taking pictures and from being following home, fake charges, and all the other pretty thing CoS love to do againts its detractors —Preceding unsigned comment added by 148.210.134.61 (talk) 23:36, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikinews International: You report the 'Anonymous' protest against Scientology

• Wikinews International: You report the 'Anonymous' protest against Scientology

That's right...we want you to be the reporter for the protest of 'Anonymous' VS. The Church of Scientology. Are you going to be in or near any of the follwing areas on Februry 10th 2008? If so, we want your pictures, your audio, video and interviews of the days protest.

Check it out at the link above, or alternatively more info at User:Skenmy/APC. Cirt 00:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

"Message to Scientology" video

"Message to Scientology", January 21, 2008

This video was added to the article. It complements the article text, which quotes from the video, but zero new text/content was added to the article. WN:ARCHIVE does not say anything about pictures, and it is within the guidelines as no new text content was added or changed in any way. Cirt (talk) 12:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Reverted self, pending discussion. Cirt (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2008 (UTC)