Talk:List of warez groups/Archive 1

message: Maybe by group, and listed in aprox. order of formation. Rich Farmbrough 00:57, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: My opinion is that the format is fine ,but we should only keep groups with either articles here or a notable source. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 18:12, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should the list be broken up

message: I suggest we get rid of the tables, see Wikipedia:Tables#When_tables_are_inappropriate. Does anyone have any opinions about this? bbx 04:05, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The table was done for a simple reason... easier to spot the vandals... most vandals suck at wikicode and would corrupt the table. I have no problem with the table format going away, but it means someone is going to have to spend more time on vandal patrol.  ALKIVAR™ 04:35, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm surprised nobody noticed an edit by someone called Goatse.sx c'mon guys. If you make it a list I'll watch it. It makes it a lot better. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 05:05, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, i have now removed the table and replaced it with a simpler list. I'm not sure about the layout, maybe it's possible to make it prettier? bbx 07:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It looks much more manageable now.  Thanks, bbx.  —RaD Man (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Table vs. list

message: I'm proposing a re-write are List of warez groups/Temp. Only notable groups. Criteria: Must have either an article here or a notable source link (subject to debate). — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 05:07, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: If its going to be only groups that are on here, then you might as well stick to our already existing category. The whole point was to include other groups that did not yet have articles.  ALKIVAR™ 15:55, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well I don't want to list every single newbie group out there, so I want some standard of notability. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 16:09, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: LMAO, you don't know any group, so you can't possibly list any newbie group. 128.100.31.201 17:48, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Umm...right. So, any suggestions for objective standards of notability. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 23:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  A news article where the group in question is the primary focus or one of the main foci of the article, in a mainstream newspaper, and the group is mentioned by name. This should be cited in the article, and any group which is added without a citation should be removed. Talrias (t | e | c) 01:05, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well we sorta do have a reasonable standard to follow... the Computer Underground Notability Test.  ALKIVAR™ 03:55, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We should combine them both. Just article-based stuff would limit it too much. Interesting acronym.. — Ilγαηερ (Tαlκ) 00:07, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-Write 

message: Can someone please source this?  And which sounds?    —RaD Man (talk) 07:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm...  OK.  There we go.  Excellent.  —RaD Man (talk) 07:21, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Microsoft uses pirated tools?

message: Personally I think some of the categories used for the groups are a bit off. If you were to break it down into detail for the PC software scene you would have the following.
For games there are floppy, CD-RIP, ISO
Then you have cracking groups which just release cracks, patches and serial generators but don't package it with the actual software its designed to break.
And then finally you have application/utility groups which release the application and include a crack, gen or even just a serial number.
It was not often that groups dabbled outside their specialised area, rather they often created a new spin-off group to handle the miscellaneous releases they might have. For example
INC created INC Utility Division for their apps
Razor 1911 for the PC was a originally floppy game group, it created ROM 1911 and later RazorCD to handle cd-rips. Then when the floppy scene died, RazorCD reclaimed the title Razor 1911. Years later RazorISO would again spin off from Razor 1911 for ISO releases.
TDU-Jam was the cd-rip division of the floppy group Genesis
Hybrid was the cd-rip division of the floppy group Eclipse
The recent Fairlight (ISO) used to release cd-rips in the mid-90's under the name ROM-light. ROM-light again was a spin-off from the earlier Fairlight PC floppy group that used to be around in the early nineties.
I believe the following categories are incorrect ..
"Applications and 0day groups" .. 0day was a term created in the BBS days to say how quicky the site obtained the releases after they were released by the pirate groups. Applying this term to release groups is a bit of a misconstruction, because in reality the good groups will always get the title (at the very latest!) on the same day as its shop release date. If there is a delay with the release then it is usually a cracking related problem rather then a supply problem.
"Application (ISO) groups" .. you might as well remove the ISO part unless you are going to divide it up into Application (ISO) and Application (RIP). Because during the 1990's nearly of the application releases were rips rather then ISO images.
It might be more clearer if you just divided the apps into three sections ..
Cracking, Application (rip), Application (iso) as they are three distinctly different types of release groups.
Or if that is too segregated then maybe just use Cracking & Application .. because there needs a clearer distinction between cracking groups and pirate groups imho.
Also here are some corrections I think need to be done within the list..
* The Humble Guys (THG)
This is not an active group and hasnt been for a decade.. needs to be moved to historical
* United Software Association (USA)
Was a games group not a 'Application (ISO) groups', needs to be moved to historical --Ipggi 03:35, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to see you here, Ipggi!  Some of us have taken a break from Wikipedia for a while, but you are welcome to be bold and make any changes you deem necessary.  —RaD Man (talk) 02:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories of the warez groups 

message: Please stop removing the commented notice from the top of the page. · Katefan0(scribble) 20:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Despite my personal warning on DickyRobert's talk page, he removed the information again. I have blocked 24 hours for vandalism. · Katefan0(scribble) 03:04, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  A note to editors from a sysop 

message: The intro to this article is self referential.
I am going to attempt to fix that. TastemyHouse Breathe, Breathe in the air  18:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self-Reference 

message: The number of groups are too numerous to count.  There were many AOL warez groups and I even ran one once (I was a minor at the time).  DyslexicEditor 09:56, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nostalgia 

message: Hitmen and Utopia should be added. They started it all on PSX and Dreamcast. Long before Kalisto was known.
--
And while adding more console stuff, PI (xbox360 games) might be worth mentioning for being first to release those.
S33k3r 01:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Console 

message: Since the main article seems to be locked, until editorial disputes are resolved, please address your concerns here.
First I'd like to ask people who seem to neglect the informative header attached to the main article to read it.
That same context is discussed here on talk page aswell, but it's buried under ton of text, and its easier to read from the header.
Like the header tries to clarify, this is List_of_warez_groups, not memberlist_of_warez_groups, locationlist_of_warez_groups or phonebook_of_former/current_members_of_warez_groups. If you like to add this information about each group/member/their cousins/dead uncles/goldfish then create an article and add link from the group name to that article, so everyone can read about it. 
Most reverts seem to be falling back to add such information which doesn't belong here and while doing so, destroying later added informative sections.
If you really disagree with anything or everything I've written above, please elaborate, what do you think we should do to make this article better?
S33k3r 20:58, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing disputes

message: I was just wondering why the page is protected - there are quite a few grammar, formatting, and POV issues that I'd like to fix. Thanks. 69.116.150.174 22:28, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the page should be unprotected. Protection has occured for three weeks, with no discussion on the issues leading to protection for the past two weeks. If vandalism continues, a simple semi-protect should suffice. If there are no objections, I will request unprotection. Calwatch 23:46, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Protection

message: Many of the group acronyms listed are obscure or incorrect. For example, DEViANCE always use their full name, and never tag their releases as DEV, which is usually associated with the courier group DEVOTiON instead (as seen here). I suspect many of the acronyms were made-up by contributors wishing to maintain the consistency of the list. I fixed all the ones I could. 202.89.153.166 21:41, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not every group has an acronym 

message: could someone tell me why the mp3 section has been removed ?
and also, please stop changing 'maVen' to 'MaVeN' because that is incorrect
194.168.3.18 12:22, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removal of mp3 groups / mis-naming of maVen 

message: I don't think that most of these groups would even come close to approaching notability guidelines, and several points of WP:NOT apply here.
I'm not sure if its possible to fix this with the nature of the article. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 16:12, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You don't seem to be very sure about very much.  If you don't understand something, it doesn't mean that it is not notable and it does not mean that it should be deleted.  Removing AfD notice.  Provide some sensible arguments with substance about why it should be deleted and I will support you all the way.  Thanks Santorummm 21:30, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am removing the AfD tag, if you look at the top of the page AfD has already been overruled two times throughout 2005, the result each time was to keep.  Please stop re-adding the AfD tag. Santorummm 19:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi!  An AfD is already active and is being discussed amongst the community at WP:AFD.  Removing the tag doesn't stop the AfD.  The tag needs to stay up until consensus is reached.  This isn't a matter of debate; it's just Wikipedia's policy that an article that has been proposed for deletion needs to be tagged as such for the duration of the AfD.  Furthermore, there hasn't been so much vandalism to the article that it needs to be semi-protected.  Lastly, don't remove the requests for citation unless you replace them with actual citations.  Feel free to contact me directly on my talk page if you have any other questions about the AfD process or if I can help you with anything else.  Cheers hoopydinkConas tá tú? 20:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi! I think you are confused.  Requests for citation on nearly every line of the article is excessive.  Feel free to manually add any you feel are warranted, but every line does not need to be cited.  You have been contacted.  Santorummm 00:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Furthermore, what is the protocol for when someone wrongly puts the article up for deletion, because they are confused or just aren't familiar enough with a subject to consider it "notable" enough? Santorummm 00:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

text: There's really no such thing as "wrongly putting an article up for deletion" if it was done in good faith, and knowing the users who suggested the article be discussed, I can say that it was absolutely done in good faith.  I encourage you to participate in the AfD and make your feelings known.  It's not up to me or you to determine notability; Wikipedia has policies outlining what it considers notable and by extension, a valid Wikipedia article.  You can check out WP:NOT for what Wikipedia is not (it's not a dumping ground for upload cruft) and WP:OR, for Wikipedia's views on original research hoopydinkConas tá tú? 20:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever, I'm done with wikipedia.  Sick of this kind of bullshit.  Do what you will with it. Santorummm 05:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable? 

message: Entries in the list without reliable sources have been removed, consistant with WP:V, WP:NOR, and WP:RS. This probably leaves out some groups that may have been notable, but not sourced. Theres no problem in adding those back, but they need to be added with reliable sources to be able to stay in the article. If anyone has questions, I'm happy to assist, and time permitting, I can try to help locate sources.
Please make sure you understand the Wikipedia policies on Verifiability (its linked to on the edit page!), and on No original research as you add content here. These policies are part of Wikipedia's backbone, and they are a large part of what makes us an encyclopedia rather than a tabloid. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 04:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources. 

message: I just added ViTALiTY to the PC games section, but some idiot deleted it, I'm adding it again because ViTALiTY is a MAJOR release group just like all the rest of them.
: I added the ViTALiTY with the link to the ban 89.102.196.30 09:51, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Why on earth did someone just delete that?

message: For the first time I've visited this page in the past year or so I can't see any newbie bittorrent groups. Good job! My only quibble is that the courier groups section is looking a bit bare, and should include historical/long-running groups like AOD, RTS and AMN. If I ever get around to finding adequate supporting references for them I'll add them later. 202.89.153.139 12:37, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Looking good

message: I'm not sure who added it but this group is definately not worth having in here.
As stated it was founded in 2007, not sure if there is any historical value ??
The grammar is horrible, I have no clue what the author was trying to express.
Nobody cares who owns the distro, and the last part of the sentence doesn't make any sense at all.
There are many other web groups worth adding here, but by no means tRUE.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.70.131.20 (talk) 16:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  TRUE Team (tRUE) 

message: Some of the references in this article are self-references. Wikipedia is not a reliable source, therefore, these references are inappropriate, and do not fulfill the requirement for verifiability. Triona (talk) 12:18, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a refernece for any of them?Geni 13:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Self references 

message: Lets verify something related to illegals groups.... Sounds fun...
Except that the scene has a very closed policy, obviously.
What can we do? 
We can delete nearly the whole article because of this "lack of source"..
The only "reliable" sources (or so called "reliable") may be scene members themselves....
And i doubt they will go on Wikipedia to correct mistakes (maybe ?)
We should keep this article and use the commom "This article lack source" thing.....
We can read interesting things on defacto2.net or aboutthescene.org....
Another thing i would like to ask... there is a great lack in cracking teams section..
in order to complete this one : 
1st choice : we list only the famous and significatives groups, but this will lead to another discussions....
2nd choice : we list all groups, with just the name, and hope there is no fake in the list....
IMHO 1st choice's best.. I personnaly have memories and , if unable to make a page for a particular group, we should be able at least to list it....
And also, "web groups" as they call themselves, have web pages with nice informations.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zekim (talk • contribs) 12:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verification obvious problems 

message: Although my English is not too good, I think this list is missing the warez group "ViTALiTY" a group rather more famous than many of the exposed here. Due to my lack of practice of the English language I can not add it myself, but I would do .......
Aunque mi ingles no es demasiado bueno, creo que en esta lista falta el grupo warez "ViTALiTY", un grupo bastante mas famoso que varios de los aqui expuestos. Debido a mi falta de practica del idioma ingles no puedo agregarlo yo mismo, sino lo haria.......
190.189.46.22 (talk) 20:06, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: ViTALiTY

message: It is a cracking group (different scene). It has a "sister group" for warez, called Phrozen Hell (-PH) which is no longer really tied to each other.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.108.94.177 (talk) 20:51, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  phrozen crew is not a warez group 

message: Why is here no difference made between P2P groups and scene warez groups? THETA for example is a P2P group.
---- (talk) 05:18, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  P2P/Scene 

message: aXXo is not a scene group.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.17.134 (talk) 06:25, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I second that, p2p groups are usually nuked in pre db's 84.108.94.177 (talk) 20:49, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I third that motion... Axxo is a P2P group / personality not a scene group. Since its been over 6 months and everyone seems to be in agreement I will remove that section. Troll-Life (talk) 14:07, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  aXXo is not a warez group 

message: A surprising ommission.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.30.145.163 (talk) 17:58, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a volunteer-maintained list, so feel free to add notable groups missing from the list. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 18:10, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

text: I never heard of them. Not a scene group. After a quick search it seems to be just one person, not a group. No secondary source found. --Ondertitel (talk) 12:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: No Skulptura ??

message: This article has become almost comical with some the entries being included.  The page itself says "Listed here are many of the more significant warez groups". Instead, we have a large number of non-notable groups that have had extremely little impact on the scene.  I propose that this page, as a "List" page, only includes groups that have their own wiki articles. Rurik (talk) 23:13, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, to a point, but I'm more interested in historical groups, some of which don't deserve a full wiki entry, but maybe have a lasting legacy.  I've noticed there are no early 80s groups listed, some of which are significant, but probably too much info is lost already to add a full entry.  The ones I'm most curious about have almost no web footprint, but are relevant from a historical standpoint; for instance, the Super Pirates of Minneapolis (or MPLS, abbreviated SPM) are one of the first, if not the first major computer piracy groups busted (I'm guessing 1981... I probably need microfiche research to get records since online archives go back to about 1986).  At least one early pirate claims to have been busted by the US secret service and not the FBI - Incognito from the Midwest Pirate's Guild, but there are no secondary accounts.  I personally knew the/a Midwest regional FBI computer crime liaison in the mid-1980s, and it's possible I could get interesting tidbits from that channel, but I'd probably have to post them elsewhere first (does wiki do interviews?).  A missing piece of this article are the pre-internet distribution clubs such as Coast-to-Coast and the National Distributor's Club (NDC), which are similar to the courier clubs mentioned, but usually worked through BBS chaining other methods.  I'm more curious about pursuing this from a 'Textfiles' type standpoint (definitely NOT an advocacy standpoint - in fact, at least one of these guilds pirates software developed at my day job, so I'd have to say I lean the opposite way, though I'd try to be objective) - a lot of that information would otherwise be lost and is, perhaps, already.  --Daschnarr (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  half of whats in there is still bolloks. the article shows nicely it was made by outsiders with little insight in neither the history nor current state of the scene. GOOD  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.143.153.84 (talk) 18:28, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Needs a huge cleanup 

message: Most popular? What a bullshit! May be only in computer magazine.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.134.46.116 (talk) 11:05, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Phrozen Crew 

message: Various edits have added p2p/torrent groups to the page, to my knowledge this page is for listing notable scene warez groups, unless we want to split it up into scene and a p2p section for notable groups, thoughts?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.253.29.205 (talk) 23:11, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  p2p vs scene groups 

message: What about ^^nosTeam^^ ?
They of course are a warez or cracking group and their official website is www.nosteam.ro...
We have to notice that they now are more popular than SKIDROW or RELOADED !!!
:I doubt it. I never heard of them before. It isn't a scene group either. Ondertitel (talk) 10:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: nosTeam are a p2p group, this article is on scene groups. Scene =/= P2P. GeekyGamer01 (talk) 19:13, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this article has to stay scene only. Courier or p2p groups are equally valid to be added, but then the lead might need a change. You must be able to cite some stuff about them though, but it would make this article more neutral. Some TorrentFreak articles might yield possible candidates. --Ondertitel (talk) 18:04, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

text: nosTeam is P2P group which repackages scene releases, therefore it is similar to other groups such as R.G. Catalyst, R.G. Revenants, R.G. Origami.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.64.26.154 (talk) 00:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  New groups 

message: I think RELOADED is still alive and should not be classified to legacy.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xionglingfeng (talk • contribs) 02:25, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why RELOADED has been classified to Legacy? 

message: The "Historical groups" section contains groups like PARADOX, which according to the article are supposedly still active. Some of the other sections contain groups that supposedly ceased activity. The article needs a reorganization. Pcap ping 13:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with this issue. I am considering removing the sections and using the group names as headings instead. --Hm2k (talk) 16:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sectioning problems 

message: Hello,
Wawa-mania is a french massive collaborative forum to share links to downloads. Each links must be uploaded by a user who have suscribed to the forum, other links are not accepted. I don't see why it doesn't takes part of the List of warez groups.
I does takes part of the riaa's bad website list, and his creator has been in trouble severals times.
This website reaches 2 millions people suscribed into, and 600 000 visitor per day. I believe it shouldn't be ignored on wikipedia.
Please reintroduce this website, if it is a true warez group, or explain me why I'm wrong by posting it.
I already made this asking on the cluebot mistakes, please answer something.
Thanks for comprehension. User:R3sJAP155M(talk) 17:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wawa-Mania 

message: if I'm not mistaken, 3DM is an active group. 108.86.234.251 (talk) 04:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't matter if the group is active or not - if the group is notable (i.e. has reliable references) you can add it to this list. I just added them. --Fixuture (talk) 19:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  3DM 

message: It's interesting to note that RELOADED and CANOPY are the same warez distributers.  Their forum can be found at Darksiderg.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.117.16.22 (talk) 17:22, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Names and Forum 

message: * 1 - to 25 January 2008
What about the cyber Army, FATALZ, and H3C?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:8BCC:A400:69E6:5E43:C821:C40 (talk) 23:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Archives

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of warez groups. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110530063531/http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2005/June/05_crm_353.htm to http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2005/June/05_crm_353.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061001195352/http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/pwa_verdict.htm to http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/pwa_verdict.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090531150417/http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/fastlink.htm to http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/cybercrime/fastlink.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:31, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The ability to stay hidden is a key feature. A lot of names have been altered or changed such as the relationship with Reloaded with the scene. After a while you get used to the fact that not everything of the internet is a webpage based functional activity!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:7751:160:994:E163:AE36:F2FA (talk) 01:30, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Prowess 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of warez groups. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111101000712/http://www.defacto2.net/organisation/reloaded to http://www.defacto2.net/organisation/reloaded
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:37, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of warez groups. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160305200717/http://defacto2.net/organisation/hybrid to http://www.defacto2.net/organisation/hybrid
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:33, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:07, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: What's about R2R, AiR and ASSiGN?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.53.77.9 (talk • contribs) 14:26, April 24, 2018 (UTC)
H2O ?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.202.58 (talk) 23:24, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other famous cracking groups 

message: Why is a poor quality, Non-free screenshot of a website for a long-gone warez group, which is only covered in a single sentence, important to this article? EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 13:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the image again, since there's been no participation in my attempts to discuss. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 18:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You made a change to the status quo of the article, and it was contensted.  This means that you need a consensus to make that change.  You do not have one.  Lack of discussion is not consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Refusal to participate in the discussion I notified you of 6 days ago and then reverting me again is disruptive. You still haven't answered my question. "Status quo" isn't a reason to keep a non-free image in this article. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read WP:#RRNO for the permissible exemptions for edit warring.  None of them apply to you, so please stop edit warring.  There is no consensus here to remove the image, and until you have a consensus, your removal is inappropriate. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: You've posted twice here and have yet to respond to this topic appropriately. "Status quo" is not a reason to keep the image. EnPassant♟♙ (talk) 02:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

text: The why appears to be that it was originally in the Phrozen Crew article and then got moved here when that was deleted. But given thst we don't discuss the website or the logo there's no real justification for using it.©Geni (talk) 05:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

text: It fails WP:NFCC criteria 8.  I have removed it again. Black Kite (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots 

message: Here's supposedly the NFO for their shutdown a couple of months ago, but I can't find any information on them online beyond this shutdown notice to add to the article.
 Moosetwin (talk) 03:24, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I found a file from a reddit comment, though that's not very much of a source and doesn't show anything not mentioned in the screenshot. Moosetwin (talk) 03:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  CAKES scene group(?) shut down