Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of convicted computer criminals/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 14:29, 5 July 2009 [1].

List of convicted computer criminals

[edit]
Nominator(s): Esemono (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

This is round 2 for this article. All the problems/comments were resolved during the review process except for a request for a good copyedit. The copyedit has since been completed so resubmitting the article. Esemono (talk) 05:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment
  • The list looks great after the copyedit, and my comments were resolved in the old FLC; however, the only thing that stands out now is that the publishers in the refs need to either be all linked (those with articles) or do not link any at all. I.e. link to CNET Networks.--Truco 503 00:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Chrishomingtang

Comment - does the list contain all notable convictions of computer crime? I just want to make sure per the comprehensiveness criteria. I am leaning to support—Chris! ct 01:43, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • All entries on the list are either notable computer criminals or their crimes are notable thus ensuring that all entries are notable convictions of computer crime. -- Esemono (talk) 04:07, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Oppose for now. In the introduction, the last sentence mentions Ancheta who was convicted for controlling botnets "to do his bidding". I think some specific details are needed here, what were the botnets used for? Spamming? ID theft?
fixed -- Esemono (talk) 00:22, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some of the sentencing dates have specific dates, and some do not. I was unable to verify the date of sentencing using the reference provided for Jan de Wit, and the Richard Jones reference specifically states he pled guilty on June 3, 1993. The penalty for Gerald Wondra is missing a cite. These inconsistencies are no small issue and seem to indicate a lack of thorough copyediting. If necessary, I would add citations to the sentencing dates for full transparency and just to be sure there are no errors. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 18:23, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cleared up the confusion for de Wit and while Richard Jones reference states he pled guilty on June 3, 1993 that doesn't mean he was sentenced the same day. Wondra's cite while was in the conviction column so I also added it to the sentencing dates for full transparency and just to be sure there are no errors. Also double checked, and confirmed all dates for the rest of the criminals. -- Esemono (talk) 00:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeah I can only find the year for Abene. I know when he started the jail sentence, Jan, 1994, and who sentenced him, Louis L. Stanton, but no specific date. Same with the Australian hackers Phoenix, and Electron. Their case too I can only find the year. -- Esemono (talk) 02:20, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I can tell you when he was indicted. I found another link that narrows it down to in the "last week". And this one which seems to indicate it happened on Nov 3. But I couldn't find any specifc dates for anyone else either, so I'm satisfied. --ErgoSum•talk•trib 14:52, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk)
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
  • "criminal convictions were rare because there was an informal code of ethics." Can you expand on this? It doesn't really explain how the ethics prevented convictions, nor the people who followed the code.
  • OK, but you didn't really explain what kind of "ethics" they follow. It's obviously not ethics in the conventional sense since hacking, simply put, is not an ethical practice. Also, "white hat hackers" is overlinked now. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:07, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you're confusing the subject of this article. This is a list of computer criminals not a detailed history/explanation on hacker subgroups. The intro should just BRIEFLY touch on the main points that correspond to the list. If the reader wants to find out more then they will click on the links to Hackers. -- Esemono (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He then went on to sell the botnets"-->He then sold the botnets
  • The numbers are inconsistently formatted in the table. We have "9 monts" (typo, too) but "Fifty seven months" and "400 hours". If you're going to spell out all the numbers, numbers between between 21 and 99 use hyphens (e.g. twenty-one and ninety-nine). Generally, though, numbers under ten are spelled out and everything else is in numeral form.
  • "US$8,054" But "AUS $1,000 "
  • "One year jail sentence"-->One-year jail sentence
  • "Six month prison sentence"-->Six-month prison sentence

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:21, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Magazines, journals, and newspapers should be in italics. You can achieve this by changing publisher= to work= in the citation template.
  • Oppose
  • My concerns are not so much with the prose, the sources or the technicality of the sorting etc. My problem is: what's the criteria for inclusion? How is it decided who goes on the list and who doesn't? What's the lowest cut off point? And frankly can a list with such an "open" definition ever be exhaustive? I just don't see how this list is complied and thus would not know how to add to it. MPJ-DK (talk) 09:52, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The criteria for what constitutes a "Computer criminal" is defined yes in a very broad sense, in this definition hacking your boss' mail would make you a computer criminal. What makes one a "notable criminal" however is vague at best. I mean if say "Mark Abene" had only been convicted of the misdemeanor would that count? He's a criminal, but maybe not "notable" - and there is no way to say that these twenty-something criminals are the only "notable convinced criminals" out there? MPJ-DK (talk) 15:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes stealing and reading someone's mail is a criminal offense. Not sure where you're getting the ages from, the list ranges from early 20s to early 40s which makes sense considering the computer industry is only a few decades old. And Mark Abene wasn't only convicted of a misdemeanor and a quick google search will confirm that he is quite famous and notable. Also, the article will be able to handle the notable question just like other featured lists like, List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people, or the List of Dartmouth College alumni -- Esemono (talk) 23:23, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I ran this article through AWB and found a couple of minor errors that I fixed. I will come back and look at it closer soon.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_convicted_computer_criminals/archive2&oldid=1166569766"