4chan /b/ archive。 3 Formas de Navegar no Site 4Chan

Controversial Reddit communities

4chan /b/ archive

There is some coverage , but 4chan is not the dark web and you don't need to visit 4chan. This needs reliable sourcing to avoid problems with. But I'm not sure if I should post this here. However, without reliable sourcing it isn't suitable for the article. As with similar cases in the past, the link to 4chan may be rather tenuous. So far the media coverage of this has been pretty poor and confusing, but it is important because of the parallels with the case. When this first arrived at 4chan, some people thought it was a hoax, but it wasn't. At the time of writing, police are still looking for the 19-year-old allegedly responsible, so applies here. After his arrest, a second body was found. The body found on Thursday was male, a police spokesman said. Nevertheless, when further facts emerge, this will probably be worth adding to the article. As far as I understood it he posted after the secound murder Picturesof him in the kitchen of the victim. This is also a reason why they don't say a single word where he is imprissioned. That is some real insane stuff. Given the social media and press coverage of the occurrence, it seems to be one of the most recent and noteworthy pranks to come out of the site. It is speculative at the moment and the regulars discussing this on 4chan are not convinced that it is linked. It isn't as clear as the potential link in the Marcel Hesse case in the thread above. Or would it not qualify since there was no genuine threat involved? Although currently similar cases are mentioned. Due to the fact that the man had mental health issues and received a non-custodial sentence, it probably isn't fair or necessary to mention this in the article. There are various incidents where people have posted threats on 4chan, but it would run into problems with unless there is significant long term notability. It was claimed initially that the was in a 4chan post, but this never came to anything and the claim is now seen as dubious. The Wilfrid Laurier University threat may well have been a hoax, so I'm not sure if it worth mentioning in the article, as it would give the impression that the incident was more significant than it was. Does this somehow have long-term notability? There are often bomb hoax threats against airlines on , and it is almost invariably a hoax because if you were going to blow up a plane, you wouldn't be boasting about it on Twitter beforehand, like these idiots. This is a fairly common event on Twitter, but for some reason the media regards 4chan hoaxes and pranks as more dangerous. The Wilfrid Laurier University incident is interesting because the British man who was arrested did not actually make the threat, but reposted on Twitter something that he had seen on 4chan lesson: what happens on 4chan stays on 4chan. The regulars on 4chan are so laid back about hoax threats that they initially regarded the Marcel Hesse incident see above as yet another hoax, but it wasn't. The Wilfrid Laurier University incident may be worth mentioning in the article because it highlight's 4chan's culture of hoax threats which are not meant to be taken seriously known as grinch posting , but which could easily lead to an arrest if other people read the threat and did not know about 4chan's culture. The users delight in saying things and posting images that will infuriate the Left. The article does not say that 4chan is politically incorrect, though. These are the 2 most well know boards. There are also boards for origami, cooking, tv and film, diy, anime of all sorts, sports, music, literature etc. Yet you say 4chan is politically incorrect cause of 1 of its 2 main boards are? I wonder if the mainstream media has ever covered these boards in any detail. They go on to throw their silly buzzwords around, while including quotes from left-wing mainstream media outlets, while delibrately not including quotes from media outlets of individuals who see no problem with 4chan. Don't judge a book by it's cover, especially when you haven't even seen the cover. I'd like to address a few of the issues raised above. Other editors are welcome to edit the section with additional content that meets the above guidelines. Gamergate is relevant as a harassment campaign, not as a donation campaign which created a video game character see for example the Gamergate Wikipedia article; the intro doesn't mention either. I propose to add the following after the first sentence: The false allegations were followed by a harassment campaign against several women in the video game industry, organized by 4chan users. I also propose to delete the next two sentences about donations and video game characters as they are about minor details which are not relevant for a short summary. Even the sources for it only mention it in passing, while focusing on the harassment campaign. Your request for removal would also be a request to remove properly cited material. Request to change the wording of this sentence from The site has been linked to Internet subcultures and activism, most notably Anonymous, the alt-right and Project Chanology. To The site has been linked to various Internet subcultures and activism groups, most notably Anonymous, the alt-right and Project Chanology. My favourite example which isn't in the article is , where a very stupid employee at a Burger King in Cleveland, Ohio got himself fired in 2012 after being outed on 4chan. Currently, the gamergate section describes it as a movement which collects donations for video games and invents video game characters. Half of the paragraph is dedicated to these minor details, and the harassment for which gamergate is primarily known is not mentioned. Looking at the wiki article - which is the result of a long search for consensus -, we can see that it is primarily a harassment campaign. This is also how the sources given in this article present the issue. The first is an article about the harassment which only mentions the game character in passing it doesn't mention donations. The second is about the character, but prominently discusses the harassment. As it is, this is a clear case of false balance, which isn't supported by the given sources. I already suggested an easy way to fix this see above. I would like to try to find a consensus on this, so this article represents the current state of notable sources. This has an element of , because the eBay listing on its own is not a reliable source. Many modern memes and events devised on 4chan are barely mentioned if not at all. While notable memories of 4chan should always exist here, the lack of maintenance on this article regarding the changes in 4chan culture and recent history really gets to me. Also, there is no need to show images which have been blanked out. Since the infobox image is a screen shot of a web page it requires and should not be on Commons. So when I've got time I'll upload the current main page with a fair use rationale. Shouldn't this aspect of 4chan be mentioned in the article? Pretty much every conspiracy theory turns up at 4chan, but it wouldn't be practical to mention all of them. It becomes notable if 4chan played a significant part in creating or propagating the theory. This led to Google changing its system for trending results. This is a very well put together article given that there really is not that much information present. Most of the facts are supported with articles to back them up. An example of this is in reference to the high profile hacks that have materialized from 4chan. The news links for the different adventures of the site still work, and the article itself is definitely neutral. This is important because it is difficult to find a vast amount of information on the site that is more factual than anecdotal. However, when it comes to specific threats of violence, saying that it is irony is not going to impress law enforcement. It's not really relevant to 4chan in my humble opinion, and certainly not of encyclopedic reference to that. Honestly that stuff falls more under Encyclopedia Dramatica territory and I propose a full removal of those sections here. This might give a misleading impression, but it would run into problems with to remove all of the controversies. To my surprise yes I'm using that ironically , no mention of the alt-right in the articles. I request that the group's mention be deleted, since no credible source has been provided. While the sources provided may be erroneous I'm quite certain there must be sources that'd support this. While appropiate, considering the origins of greentexts as a writing style, the article makes no mentions of greentexts at all. I suggest either a section be added or the redirect be removed so a separate article can be made at some point. There is not much point in having the redirect under these circumstances. It means quoting or telling a story in green text, as explained here:. It's one of the popular features of 4chan threads, but isn't explained here. It is believed that 4chan helped to fan the flames of the controversy with further trolling. As for whether it made 4chan infamous, it was probably infamous already. I want that added to the intro paragraph! If anyone has ideas about moving content from here to there then post to. I read some but not all of them. Cite 55 is offensive and need to be changed. Anyway, templates should not make statements that cannot be supported by the text and citations in the article. Anitisemitism is in the alt-right template at the bottom of the page, and this has various links explaining the type of content on the site. The problem with is that it gives excessive prominence to something that is not discussed and cited in the article. I have partially reverted your edit, please discuss here if you think a link to should be in the template. I couldn't find any article other than the one on Know Your Meme discussing the Happy Merchant and its link to 4chan. I also think that the reverted edit took up a large amount of space explaining something that is in the alt-right template.

次の

Talk:4chan/Archive 17

4chan /b/ archive

Also, the 'Evil Embassador' description for the Gendo meme needs to be removed, as nobody refers to Gendo as the Evil Embassador except maybe the person who wrote it. Just because people don't post it a thousand times a day doesn't mean it isn't a meme. Cockmongler is a classic and established meme, yet it doesn't get posted much. Memes only really get posted alot when they first catch on. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I think only memes that spread to other websites should be listed here. Seeing as how it's all but impossible to verify anything that actually happens on 4chan, due to post pruning, only memes that have been notably seen outside of 4chan should go in the article. It techniclly qualifies because it's use has gone outside of 4Chan, abeit it's more of a reality thing than a website thing. This article needs verification badly. Moot's real name has never been revealed. Ross is a Stanford graduate student, who appears in those photos. January 10th situation Should something be added about the site being down today because of apparently a ddos attack? I mean, 4chan goes down all the time. We might see when it's back up and moot posts something. The site went down because of the same problems we always have--it was just a coincidence. Go find some other internet forum to chat on. January 29, 2006 Just an anonymous remembering reading about it on wikipedia, thought I should bring it up. There's a lot of n00bs who'd like to know. Tom Delay's face is reference to Cover Tom, who has a similar facial expression. I wish there were a meta-4chan where people could talk about 4chan itself in a non-4chan-ish setting. Now that you mention it, you're right. I was just wondering what the right name was if it were to be kept at all. Fortunately these are virtually always lies to troll pedos. Raptor Jesus Was this deleted as a popular meme? I've re-added it as I think it's a worthy addition - far worthier than some others on there in fact. The text needs expanding and stuff, I only wrote a very rough description. See if it's still there in a month. In my opinion, the memes listed should be limited to just those that have been around long enough to be truly notable. Anyone who can do a whois search knows that it is hosted on the same servers as 4chan is. Must've been recent, they're still talking about it. Also, a lot of this is unverifiable but it breaks 4chan's heart to see their precious towercat erased from the site. As it's pretty much irrelevant to the history. The fight: Fred allegedly created hentai images, and managed to get all traces of them erased from the internet. No threads about anything were deleted for any reason pertaining to Fred Gallagher. Fred Gallagher has never even contacted 4chan. Something on the same topic has been readded, but I don't think it should be there. I really don't think anything should be considered notable unless it's still remembered next month, at least. But images were not recorded, so nothing remains proven. Even mentioning it starts up major arguments. The fred images have been verified by internet archive links. Megatokyo and fredart's forums were took a major beating sometime earlier today, they were forced to disable new user registration as a result of it! The only reason I was aware of your presence was a locked thread in one of the board sections. Seriously, it was not notable. Stop adding this junk into the article. It has had this effect on 420chan. I'll support the reporting of that post appearing, but not the crackypedia link. I read the cracky chan story on here and another place and I'm still unsure about it. I know she had face shots of her with a clown face and mouse ears and she needed dental work. Aside from that what exactly happened? I heard at another source she only posted a few pictures and then people found them on her live journal? In this talk page you say she posted naked pictures of herself in 4chan--is this true? Those ones where she had the mouse ears and raggedy anne makeup I think are the best ones. If I was rich I'd buy the rights and make a cartoon out of them and I think it would get ratings. If so, I think it should be added here. It would seem that much of that article is in fact copied from this one. Both sites have their articles in the public domain. I think it might be worthwhile to have something on you in this article because of your contributions, but I also fear it will bring much drama and revert wars. The article mentions that I wrote the crappy board software and that is about all which is notable about me. Their entire aim is to mock and parody internet phenomena, so talking about the validity of their articles is rather ridiculous. Their admins revert anything non-furry that is actually funny. Perhaps I'm too old for that site. Thank god the memes were removed and linked back to WikiWorld. This article shouldn't be a meme repository, there are other sites for that. Fixed some inaccuracies, will work on fixing whatever is left and grammar later. Before you did that, I was thinking of suggesting that the memes be alphabetized. As they were in random order it's hard to find anything. Do you really expect the wikiworld page to go down? They're verified, they're funny and they are important to give somebody a basic information of what is 4chan about. This article without the Memes-List is basically like a Video Game Preview without Screenshots. They are unverified and irrelevant. I think that comment is an example of poor consistency. Go and look up some site statistics before you try to decide what's important and what's not. Then the memes would be there and sometimes people want a reference for them so we should have them somewhere even on a web page. Maybe there alredy is a meme article for 4chan, I forgot. The memes are cataloged at WikiWorld and should stay there. Wikipedia either needs Memes back in this Article or an own article on memes. Or maybe it's because linking them makes the article a hell of a lot more streamlined and easier to read. In fact, most of the memes that were on this article were already aped from the WikiWorld page, so what's the point? It does not meet and borderline on and is against. This is 4chan's entry in an something that purports to be an encyclopedia not 4chan's own wiki. You should go see a doctor for that. The wikiworld site is down 90% of the time, making it nearly useless. Nothing is proposed here, just a statement of easily verifiable fact. In fact, without knowing some base information about the memes, 4chan is downright confusing. This should qualify as historical impact. One more thing, a link to a site that is down at least at the time of writing this is no help at all, and probably needs to be removed due to its dodginess. Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics such as quotations, aphorisms or persons. If you want to enter lists of quotations, put them into our sister project Wikiquote. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic. I will now stop with the 50 million edits to this talk page, heh. You made a mistake, but at least you were civil and backed up what you were saying. That's quite a bit better than the average talk page contributor. What do you guys think about a section in this article about notable things 4chan has done in general? Somehow, I don't think it will stop there, so it may be a good idea to record them here. What do the rest of you think? I wanted to delete the addition of the Japanese translation of the warning next to the link to 4chan at the bottom of this article. I erred on the side of caution and didn't, though. I really doubt this is necessary, since this is the English Wikipedia, but I could be wrong. It also made the article look ugly and as Sporkot said, this is the English language Wikipedia after all. Is it linked to the 'desu' meme? Are you talking about Suiseiseki's eyes? It's missing from the list of memes, and I was really looking forward to an explination for this meme. Don't suppose there's anything to it that the site is still having troubles as much as it's joked about, I wouldn't be suprised if it were under investigation? Also, sign your edits, please. What the heck is the point of tagging the anonimity section for cleanup? Threads get pruned relatively fast, and as far as I know, there is no perpetual link or archive. As a result, many of the statements in this article will be based in fact, but will not have an available primary source. I understand we're trying to shape Wikipedia into a more credible information base, but it's getting ridiculous. We could cite if it was really essential, but that's not academic or anything either. I've put a reply on your thread, anyhow. It contains pretty much what I intend to put in the alteration. Many of us are not white, straight, in love with inaccessible little girls, american, healthy, rich, in a happy family, in a great job, convinced that our country is run intelligently, with a simple sexuality and no personal drama in our past or present. For a short while we become the giddy crowd, the hooligans, the satires and the councellors without gender color or difference. We become legion and are free from all social restrain, free from censorship and free from ourselves. Never underestimate anonymous, never judge us on what is displayed: what you are seeing is just us on the potent drug of utter freedom. Besides, this isn't really a discussion page about 4chan. I'm sorry, I'm not very good at wikipedia but I'd like the 4Chan article to be as good as possible out of respect for Mother 4Chan. Would it be a worthy idea to elaborate on the function of the boards in the article and possibly create another section of the article on them? I want to ask before I write this and make sure people know about the edit so some people can proofread what I wrote for factuality and formatting and whatnot after I actually write it. I'm not sure, however, that per board descriptions are entirely neccessary. We don't do that for or for a reason: the list would be really long. There is no need to add pointless length to this article. It can be placed before the See Also section, and not disrupt the article. It may be infamouns to the members of 4chan, however, it is not notable to the rest of the world and is from the perspective only of perhaps some or all of the members of 4chan. Unless you consider primary sources unreliable, I'd say that verifies it. If you want corroboration, might I suggest asking , who currently is a mod and was one at the time of this incident. Nijura well, it's most recent incarnation, anyway is located at. Again, VacBob could act as a primary source. We must compare it to all other known boards to verify this? As such, it's very difficult to get a cohesive and fair comparison. Milestone post counts like 9 million, etc. What's astounding is that it seems that you ignored about why verifiability is not as simple as you are trying to make it out to be. I know I should be assuming good faith here, but they've been on this page for more than a week, and only one other person has commented on it. I was recently browsing through a very anti-4chan message board, and I heard the phase 420chan. Obviously I had no intention of going to the site directly, so I decided to use wikipedia. But why was I forwarded into an article with no mention of this site? There is nothing illegal on it, feel free to browse. I was wondering if 4chan's infamous sustained attacks on places like Habbo Hotel are worth mentioning. I've seen a couple people get banned for the Linksys stuff, but Habbo threads and that Naruto-Kun invasion never resulted in bans. Furthermore, it's kind of hard to pin down exactly who participated in invasions. I don't believe that a section should be added pertaining to raids, but I believe at least a passing reference should be made, seeing as 4chan has already been mentioned in the Ebaumsworld article concerning raids. I think then it is very clear why the site's access was blocked - and there doesnt need to be several colloquially written sentences feigning ignorance and obliviousness as to why that happened. It's verfiiable and relevant information, fairly well written and not too long. Wikipedia has means for dealing with vandals. I wouldn't be suprised that if the list cockmongler, pedobear, etc. It's just a pain to verify most of this stuff. Moreso towards Ryulong, because you've been taking this cavalier attitude towards this page for much longer. There was also the section clean up that's mentioned a bit farther up on this page, and then these recent editting conflicts. I'm sorry about the destructive edits, and I will solely make constructive ones if any to this article in the future. Talk page trimming This discussion page really needs to be trimmed of the idiotic comments from random editors who just wanted to be disruptive. I don't know what I should and should not archive, but the is definitely something that should not be on a talk page, even if it is for 4chan. However, moderators often miss it for upwards of 20 minutes, hence the meme, as a result of it either being buried in the replies of a topic, or because the moderator on duty is not actively moderating as they are occupied with other activities. Child pornography is not overwhelmingly prevalent, as it is sometimes only posted once a day, and almost always during the act of trolling. I do not believe that 4chan reports to the authorities, as the staff wishes not to draw to much attention to the posts of illegal material. As for the phenomenon being not-so-recent, you're right. In fact, it is very similar to the kopipe found on i. I tried to work that in there, but it just came out awkward. I've been constantly removing mentions of the raid because of another conversation higher up, that never had a consensus on the notability of the raids. However, its not at all relevant to the article, so this removal was a good choice. That's what Wikiworld's page on 4chan is for. They are a community that thrives on disruption and simple comedy. I don't back down against vandals. I just hope that they stop referring to me by name in their edit summaries. As such, I have listed it for speedy deletion and removed the link from this article. Anybody who would come to this page, whether a poster on 4chan or not, would benefit equally if not more from learning about the culture of 4chan, a major component of which is its memes, rather than about its history and background. We should not link to offsite wikis to get this job done. On the subject of the actual list of memes article, each description should be short and concise. A short description of the origin if available, including the year of its appearance, the meme's type or classification, a short description of how it is used, and perhaps a small example of it in action should be all that is included. If available, verification of the existence of the meme and the facts and origin surrounding it should be included, but due to the constant deletion of posts that would verify such things, this can sometimes be impossible. The groups are counter-memes, stand-alone memes, psuedo-memes, and combo-memes. Examples of stand-alone memes would be Cockmongler and Pedobear, as they are memes which are not often used in tandem with or in response to any post. The reason they are a psuedo-meme is because the only common characteristic they usually share is their template. Another example of a psuedo-meme would be memes that were spawned as a result of a minor variation to an existing meme. A psuedo-meme can also be used to refer to a meme that was either relatively short-lived or quite unpopular. As such, many psuedo memes and almost all forced memes should never be included, unless they are added with careful consideration. These classifications are just suggestions, any other ideas or changes to this suggestion would be greatly appreciated. It can be found and it is linked in the 4chan article. We do not need a list at Wikipedia, as it would compromise the integrity of the encyclopedia. In fact, the WikiWorld page was copied word for word and pasted into an article as it is shown above. Frankly, the WikiWorld page is sufficient for any and all information on the memes of 4chan. For the uses of wikiworld, the article is sufficient, but Wikipedia requires something a bit more concise and less bloated. Also, in the event WikiWorld goes under or the Wikiworld article experiences changes that are detrimental to its viability as a source or reference, it would be good to have an established list hosted here. Also, the idea I proposed introduces useful ways to classify and organize memes in a way that is a bit more presentable and obviously quite different. Though I won't fight for it, going down kicking and screaming, I still believe that the addition of a meme page would be quite beneficial to readers. However, I in no way support the outright plagiarism of the list from Wikiworld. Seeing as how the inclusion of memes on wikipedia, whether seperated or included in the main page, has been a subject of debate on this page, I believe that we should put this to a vote. But the classification methods are contrite and have no real merit. Various memes that have appeared on 4chan are not in any way notable or should be mentioned in a serious encyclopedia. Lists of image macros will garner the various anonymous editors and it will be as big a magnet for vandalism as several articles on notable internet sites. It is best to leave such information to other Wikis that are not focused on being serious, such as , , or WikiWorld. However, 4chan itself and many other websites should never be mentioned in serious encyclopedias. But that may be beside the point. Also, I don't see too much extra vandalism as a result of the memes being listed seperately, as this page already risks most of the rampant vandalism simply by existing here. However, I will not challenge the deletion of a new Meme page if it becomes the victim of such vandalism. I still believe the benefits far outweigh the risks, and I still believe the wikiworld page isn't quite the most reliable or sometimes even accurate reference. The and the are mentioned on Wikipedia. I know I may have seen a section on Pedobear somewhere, however this may have been on the Wikiworld site. Still, a list of 4chan memes will attract vandalism like that seen on this page, and it would be hard to find good accepted memes avoiding the Millhouse, Suiseiseki, and Gaston dilemmas. However, I still don't think it would hurt to add a very short mention, as in a couple of words or just the name with a link to an outside source or Wikipedia article. As shown by the talk concerning its deletion, many people wanted it to be deleted or merged, as it already was mention in the 4chan article. And then there would be the problems of finding verifiable resources on the memes, which will also be extremely difficult. A simple link to 4chan would suffice if it was something concerning the existence of these memes. Also, of course I believe a seperate article is not good, as you convinced me. You must not have read that comment, I now believe we should give passing mention to at least a few of these memes, as many are integral to the understanding and research of this community. Simply including these memes in passing mention, as in one sentence, or including them in a small, small list would benefit this article. One example is Osakaphone, which was noteworthy enough to be featured on a national news program. And then there are the guidelines at that we'll have to deal with, and 4chan wouldn't be a sufficient link for verifiability of the memes. One example is Osakaphone, which was noteworthy enough to be featured on a national news program. Most of the memes I've mentioned have been relevant enough to both be verified and given at least their own section in other articles, what is the point in not mentioning them here? If they are big enough to be mentioned there, why don't they deserve at the very least a sentence of mention and citation similiar to the articles they came from? All of them have already been cited, anyway. I dropped those halfway through the conversation, because, as I said more than twice, you convinced me that while possible, it would be a bit of a pain to verify them. What I just said in my last comment was that memes that clearly came into the English-speaking world through 4chan ought to be listed or at least mentioned on this main 4chan page, not on a seperate one. As such, I have changed the title of this section, as it does not involve the idea of a seperate page anymore. I'm as interested in you as keeping this a nice, clean, verified, useful, and guideline-following article, and that's why I think we should mention the memes I mentioned. And before you say that the other pages are just as much in violation of the guidelines as this article may risk being, take a look at the Nevada-tan article. Not only was it formerly a candidate for featured article, but I believe it was also peer verified. I believe they do, but as this isn't encyclopedia or my article, I'd like to check first before we should consider going any further. The Osakaphone is completely new to me. It seems to me that both are verifiable and relevant. The reason you can't remember them is because they were on 4chan before the last death, and you probably came to 4chan after that. Also, I think that we need to establish a new rule for this page, which addresses one of your concerns, and that would be no new memes should be ever be added unless 1. Unless those guidelines are followed, it will be immediately be reverted, and if the meme mentions become a big problem for this article, they will eventually become fair game for immediate deletion. And one last thing, do you want the meme mentions to become a list and a new section in the article, or should they have a sentence or paragraph dedicated to them in another? And perhaps we can mention some of the more notable memes that have other articles as mentions in Memes for the 4chan article. Bananaphone was the song used for the Osakaphone animation. Then perhaps a short list of the notable memes that are listed elsewhere can be added under the meme section, however it should be watched carefully. So if an unacceptable number of edits are made to add memes that do not have proper documentation or relevance, and it becomes too much of a hassle to stop such vandalism, than we downgrade to listing them in a paragraph. If it doesn't stop, we revert that section to its current state, and scrap the idea of a list of memes permanently. I think just a simple list in the memes section will be sufficient, and then we watch for ridiculous additions to the short list on the page. While this is pretty off-subject, but does relate to verifiability, do you think a link to one of 4chan's news posts would suffice as a good citation for the problems with Paypal, Yowcow etc. And on the subject of citations, do you think perhaps the mention of the Soviet Sunday theme days should be removed? I don't see how we could verify it here, though I have seen it with my own two eyes on a number of occasions. And I've been trying to push for the Soviet Sunday thing to be removed. It's only happened maybe twice. But there have been numerous threads which have used embedded flash and html to make it and other themes a thread-wide or page-wide theme. Soviet Sunday itself is not that notable in terms of being relevant, but theme hacks appear enough on 4chan to be notable. It's not easy to show verification of specific themes, so I'm going to erase Soviet Sunday from the article. Perhaps a mention of just the themes would be acceptable with no verification, as it seems to be the case on with the mention of templates. Let me nip this limited discussion on the bud. The consensus was that we do not create a list of memes for an article. Note also that 2 people is not consensus. Wait until someone else comments on your grand ideas before you go ahead. And while I do admit that this conversation sounds like it has drifted into that topic, it's useless to complain about this discussion's location now. Also, as I remember, the conversation you cited discussed the removal of the then-current list of memes. This conversation concerns the addition of a much more professional, reliably verified, and relevant list that, most importantly, will not be modified without prior consensus. This means that there should be no more arguments over the removal of newly added memes from the list, as the list will not be allowed to be modified unless prior consensus has been reached. I know that this article should not take on large modifications without general consensus, and I made that perfectly clear in the above conversation. As you can see, I have not edited the meme section of this article, as I was waiting for more input and agreement before making the change. So please, enlighten me with your opinion instead of marching in and contributing not much of anything to this conversation. By the way, here is how I would like to implement the proposed changes: Though many memes often do not become popular outside of the 4chan community, some have grown to the point where they have become widely recognized. Some of these popular originated inside of 4chan, while others used 4chan as a conduit to spread to the English-speaking world. As you have requested that we have more people give their input and approval concerning this new addition, I think we should put this to a vote. Obviously, I agree with what has been proposed during this conversation. As put it: Read the verifiability policy at. This comment was then seconded by , and myself, all regular contributors to this article. When the issue was pressed further, made it very clear why specific memes, be they listed separately or in the main article, have no place here: What exactly is encyclopedic about a list of memes? It does not meet and borderline on and is against. Note that these comments were made on this talk page more than 4 months ago. The consensus was clear: No specific memes can be listed on this page. Memes, by their very nature, are fleeting and transient. Then, the whole debate over said meme was merely a waste of time and effort that could be spent improving other articles on this site. The earlier debate fully understood this point, thus it did not need to be made explicit. Since you seem to favor verbosity, let me spell it out again just to be safe: There should not be any kind of list, collection, compilation, etc. I assure that was nothing more than a response to what I considered a condescending comment from you, and as I did not wish for you to create an air of superiority, I countered your statement. We do not need to condescend eachother, and though there were no direct attacks, your second post was just as condescending as the first was. The line must be drawn here, before this turns into an edit war, a flamewar, or us trying to flaunt our e-penises. I don't want this to sink to that level. Anyway, without a doubt I respect your dedication to the rules and guidelines established by the Wikipedian community, and I don't take offense that you use that as the basis of your argument. However, I, too, have paid attention to the guidelines. In fact, I've read them 3 times again since the beginning of this debate, not to mention countless times before, once when I first suggested this, once because of Ryulong, and once because of you. I've checked my proposal against it each time, and I now believe that my proposal is refined enough to be in this article. I totally agree with you on the fact that the previous list was complete and utter shite, but how is my proposal and list of approved memes affected by a decision concerning the completely unprofessional list that was up before I proposed this? I am merely listing other sourced and completely verified articles concerning memes that have had an effect on internet culture in a significant way, mainly by spreading past the boundaries of a small community in relation to the the internet at large and becoming something larger than just a meme that exists in two or three forums. We need not verify anything within the 4chan article concerning the memes, since no information concerning them is listed here besides their names, and the ones I have listed have all their shit together as far as I know. On the subject of reading the discussions on this page, I obviously have, as I have already cited them numerous times. Instead, I think that you might not have read this entire debate, but neither of our opinions matter on the issue of whether we have read each post or not, as we obviously have read enough to form coherent arguments. On the subject of memes not being important, or relative enough, or that they have their fleeting moments of fame before they become buried forever, it has been shown that some memes have had a significant effect on internet culture, and that some of them are still going strong. Now, I'm not sure if you realized what I was saying when me and Ryu came to an agreement on what the list should be like. I proposed a short list containing all 5 of the memes I had verified as both relevant and as having a significant effect on internet culture. It won't take 3 months for a meme to be put here, and god knows with all the reposts on 4chan, no meme is going to dissappear anytime soon, and it wouldn't matter if it does, as if it was relevant enought to be argued over, it was obviously relevant enough to internet culture and history to be added even after its time has passed. In short, the list proposal works, I don't hate you, I'm not expressly trying to attack and won't make it seem like I am anymore, I want to keep this article just as clean, polished, and relevant as you do, and the big 4chan memes I have listed, and any others that happen to spread from 4chan and become as big as any of the ones I have listed, all deserve a spot on this page as they were integral to not only 4chan but the current state of internet culture as a whole. Oh, and on the subject of Wikiworld, if it's not good enough quality to be listed here, its not a good enough source of information to be linked to, either. And the fact that something reached consensus months ago doesn't mean that consensus completely applies to a newer, better executed idea in the here and now. I'm totally fine with mentioning that some memes have become much more popular, so long as they are not listed in any way. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the.

次の

4chan and /b/: An Analysis of Anonymity and Ephemerality in a Large Online Community

4chan /b/ archive

This means we are not going to ban distasteful subreddits. We will not ban legal content even if we find it odious or if we personally condemn it. This started discussion in the media about the ethics of and outing on the. The community, which featured graphic depictions of , was banned after its moderators were found to be sharing users' personal information online, and collaborating to protect one another from sitewide bans. The subreddit's leaders decided to ban individuals advocating for murder. However, the subreddit promoted rape and suicide. The subreddit was banned on September 30, 2019, after violating Reddit's Content Policy with respect to bullying and harassment. He also expressed concern that he would be falsely labeled a child pornographer or anti-semite because of some of the subreddits he created. Within a day of the article being published, Brutsch was fired by his employer, and the link to the exposé was briefly banned from Reddit. He stated on Reddit after the article was published that he had received numerous death threats. Wong stated that the staff had considered a site-wide ban on the link, but rejected this idea for fear it would create a negative impression of the site without getting results. Brutsch later briefly returned to Reddit on a different account and criticized what he stated were numerous factual inaccuracies in the Gawker exposé. In the interview with journalist , Brutsch was apologetic about his activity on Reddit. He explained that he was most fond of the appreciation he got from other redditors, and that Reddit helped him relieve stress. Brutsch also described the support he had from administrators, stating that he had received an award for his contributions. The public outpouring of hostility towards Brutsch following the exposé prompted commentators such as of and Michelle Star of to question the morality of outing as a way to enforce societal standards online. Several commentators have expressed concern that the of Brutsch to serve as an example to others is legitimizing and exposing individuals such as Brutsch to mass retribution. The subreddit was quarantined in September 2018, at which point it had over 400,000 subscribers. Following the 15 March 2019 , more posts were made on the subreddit. The subreddit was banned on 25 April 2019 for violating Reddit's content policy regarding violent content. This subreddit was banned on 21 March 2018. See also: Deepfakes was a controversial subreddit that superimposed famous female actresses onto pornographic videos, made using FakeApp, without the consent of the actresses. After the subreddit was given notoriety from the press, videos from the subreddit were banned from and. On 7 February 2018, the day after banned the videos, the subreddit was banned as well. FatPeopleHate On 10 June 2015, Reddit banned five subreddits, citing an anti-harassment policy. Due to the decision to ban these subreddits, some users moved to , a social aggregation website similar to Reddit. The subreddit was banned on 12 September 2018 due to violating Reddit's content policy regarding violence and personal information. GunsForSale In January 2014, published a story describing the sale of guns on the site. The report suggested that sellers were doing so to exploit a loophole in U. The definition of an incel on the subreddit was someone who has unintentionally gone at least six months without a romantic partner and is at least 21 years old; self-described incels are largely heterosexual men. Users deemed too female-friendly, or who claimed that women experienced inceldom to the same extent as men, were banned. Following the October implementation of a new Reddit policy that prohibited the of violence, the subreddit was banned on 7 November 2017. The subreddit's leaders disavowed the and deleted some posts by members who praised Alek Minassian's alleged actions. In September 2018, the subreddit was quarantined and on October, it was banned. Erik Martin, general manager of Reddit, defended the jailbait subreddit by saying that such controversial pages were a consequence of allowing free speech on the site. Initially this caused a spike in Internet traffic to the subreddit, causing the page to peak at 1. Dozens of Reddit users then posted requests for these nude photos to be shared to them by private message. Others claimed that the thread believed to have prompted the closure was created by members of the forum in an attempt to get the section shut down, rather than the regulars of the forum. It was banned on 10 September 2018 for violating Reddit's content policy regarding violent content. Content on the subreddit was often racist, homophobic and transphobic in nature. Million Dollar Extreme's channel had been terminated earlier in 2018. This subreddit was banned on 23 November 2016, for violating Reddit's policy against , as users would post the personal details of people allegedly connected to this conspiracy. It was controversial for its promotion of violence against leftists and other groups. For instance, users would make reference to , an execution method used by. It included both discussions surrounding the ethics of suicide and posts containing rants from Reddit users. This subreddit was banned on 14 March 2018. It dissuaded people from shoplifting from smaller stores which were presumed to suffer greater losses from theft. Near the end of its existence, over 77,000 people were subscribed to the subreddit. Main article: In August 2014, Reddit users began sharing a large number of naked pictures of celebrities stolen, using , from their private accounts. The subreddit contained most of the images. Some of the images may have constituted child pornography, as the photos of and from the leak were claimed to have been taken when the women were underage, though this remains controversial. The subreddit was closed by Reddit administrators in September 2014. The scandal led to wider criticisms concerning the website's moderation, from and. A body reported to be that of the missing Brown student misidentified as a Boston bomber suspect, who had been missing for a month before-hand, was found in in on 25 April 2013, as reported by the Rhode Island Health Department. The cause of death was found to be suicide. The subreddit was later made private. In September 2013, a similar subreddit dedicated to finding the was banned by the Reddit admins. A Reddit employee restored the forum and its moderators an hour later. Outlets such as The Huffington Post interpreted the report as saying the subreddit was a. But we did call out specific examples of misogyny and the threat, overt or implicit, of violence. Later on it was discovered that they had identified the wrong woman, and it has been reported that many death threats had been sent to her school and employment. Georgetown University confirmed that she was not the same person as the blog's author after receiving threatening messages. Around 400 false rape accusations were made by men's rights activists against members of the college, feminists and fictional people. After the in 2019, many posts appeared in the subreddit arguing that the shootings were justified, filled with anti-Muslim hate. It has been associated with several right-wing movements and the alt-right because of its attacks on and mockery of rape. It was discovered that a New Hampshire legislator created the subreddit and posted demeaning comments about women. After this discovery, he resigned from office. Currently, the subreddit is quarantined. In order to prove they are not white, a user would have to take a picture of their forearm together with their username. In addition, users who have proved themselves to be black were given a special flair on the subreddit. The result by the subreddit gained recognition from online news sources. It has been criticized for often objectifying men and treating dating as a game to be won. Women who post on the subreddit asking for dating advice are often given advice that has been described by The Verge as socially and sexually conservative, and oppressive to women. This section needs to be updated. In particular: Reddit's stance on this matter has changed. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. June 2018 In accordance with the site's policies on free speech, Reddit's admins say that they do not ban communities solely for featuring controversial content. Critics of this position have argued that Reddit has not been consistent in following its free speech philosophy. Akhil spent the most time with Sunny before his suicide, weekends at Brown where he tried to help his youngest child foresee a future.

次の