Talk:2007 Boston Mooninite panic/Archive 1

message: People should be aware that Interference, Inc. is a company that specializes in astroturf campaign -- a lot of the commentary you see posted by them on blogs, reddit, and similar was either posted by them, or "me too" blogs. It's impossible for me to say how much. Here's some more detailed background from a student at MIT (disclaimer of bias: who is currently sitting in the same apartment as me) . When you look at the history of the incident, you can see that Turner Broadcasting hired a company that it knew specialized in breaking the law for profit to engage in trespass and vandalism on their behalf. Vandalism is a first degree misdemeanor (highest level of crime below a felony). The level of trespass on government property varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but is most likely also a serious crime in Boston. This is neither the first incident of corporate vandalism (which is a growing problem engaged), nor the first incident of Interference, Inc. engaging in it, or otherwise breaking the law. 71.235.234.182 15:13, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Astroturf

message: I would definitely say we should keep this page. Sure it is a very current event and current news but it is also something that will be a lasting historical event. This is on the same lines (although not as important) as another recent event in Boston, the Big Dig ceiling collapse. Fsamuels 22:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Very interesting.  Perhaps someone should look to putting a couple of international reactions in if possible, then. Bitnine 04:17, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Delete or Keep 

message: The fact that this involved ATHF does not trivialize the event, the use of pop cultural icons in actual bombing in America has already happened with the mailbox bomber Lucas Helder who was making a Smiley face on the map with his pattern of pipe bomb attacks 
see http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/05/09/mailbox.pipebombs/index.html
Actual knowledge of Adult Swim might even increase police suspicions, as a cultural terrorist in another of their shows (Ghost in the Shell) used a cartoon figure as a signature to his attacks (the Laughing Man). So someone knowledgable about Adult Swim might actually be more suspicious of strange devices with cartoon figures flicking off the man specificlly placed in areas where there is a large amount of foot traffic. The notablitiy of this article is more dependent on the post 9/11 mindset then it is on ATHF.
:--Wowaconia 06:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: except that no authority remotely put forward any such theory by way of explaining their reaction to what they at one point called "sophisticated electronic devices" hours after they knew they were not bombs. 68.60.68.203 16:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The use of cultural images in attacks

message: This photo was found on 4chan's /b/, where the "Never Forget" has become a meme, so I think the connection is almost sure. Also, a photo saying "LOLS ARE NOT ILLEGAL" was shown, and both were claimed to be the responsibilty of "/b/tards," users of the imageboards. If anyone has sources for this, or a license for the image, please include it. I will I update the article accordingly.
That picture (the one being held up) is originally from a Fark thread (see the 2007-01-31 06:54:31 PM post).—Wasabe3543 01:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never Forget 

message: This article doesn't meet any of the general criteria for a Speedy Deletion. In fact, the reason given -- "Wikipedia is not a news site" meets one of the non-criteria listed for a Speedy Deletion, "Reasons derived from WP:NOT."
To address the reason, though, as discussion both on this talk page and the talk page of the ATHF article has shown, the incident has become a notable event that it exceeds the scope of the ATHF article. The arrests of two of the artists involved, the hysteria and city-wide logjam that resulted, and actions by city officials demanding compensation from Turner show that this is probably more than a passing news event. Further reasons and debate can be found above on this talk page and here. Purifiedwater 22:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I removed the speedy deletion. Gdo01 22:40, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contesting the Speedy Deletion 

message: Should there be something about how, in movies, bombs often have electronic displays?  1.618033989 23:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Potential cause 

message: Now that we have consensus that this article should exist, shouldn't we shorten the text about this incident that is currently on the Aqua Teen Hunger Force page. After all, this is the main article about the incident and there should only be a short summary with a link provided for more information (this is already done). Gdo01 23:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds good. Jeff Silvers 05:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Agreed but there should be more info that relates the event to the show on the Aqua Teen Hunger Force, i.e. it's for the movie, the characters depicted, etc. Mike wiki 18:00, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge: the other way around

message: I can't make these changes because someone has protected the article. I'm leaving them here in the hopes that someone else might make or at least consider the changes.
: The G4 network stuff does not deserve to be as early in the article as it is.
: The article now claims that an MBTA employee spotted the first device. Thats not consistant with the source given and I've not been able to find a source so far to validate the claim.
: The phrase "like most anything electronic" amounts to a added POV. The statement as previous was "the devices had some characteristics in common with bombs" and was meant to be a good-faith neutral statement giving the boston police the benefit of the doubt. Batteries was also changed to "power source" for unclear reasons. The POV phrase amounts to taking sides and should be removed.
:The junk self-promotion for blogs should be removed: "Prominent blog sites such as Boing Boing continued this theme, alleging that the "big media outlets" [were] botching the hell out of the Boston LED terror story" [19]. The Boston Globe newspaper opined that the "marketing gambit exposes a wide generation gap", quoting one 29-year old blogger as writing "Repeat after me, authorities. L-E-D. Not I-E-D. Get it?"[20]" The facts of the story should not polluted with all sorts of material covering the coverage of the story. If people want that stuff, there should be a section created on the coverage of the event.
::See Alleged over-reaction section, above. And it's not junk self promotion, but thanks for the patronage. --Tagishsimon (talk)
:There should be mention of the two men detained in Chicago who were taking down the ads. It was added with citations but for reasons unknown removed.
: There is an article . The article says that some of the devices found yesterday in boston were not related to the magnetic lights. "The two devices found in an office at Tufts-New England Medical Center and attached to the Longfellow Bridge yesterday morning were not the marketing devices that sparked a daylong panic in Boston, but simulated pipe bombs, police officials said last night." It would be nice if someone summarized the information and included it in the article.
:The article also still needs alot of work in terms of giving a full timeline of events. 63.3.5.129 05:37, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  necessary fixes 

message: the very 'style' of the devices and their placement is so similar to the way Graffiti Research Lab's does it, that one could assume that the ad's were inspired by GRL.
One of the videos posted of the devices being placed, in fact, mentions GRL in the end.
The devices are inspired by something called an "led throwie", originally created by, you guessed it, GRL.
It only makes sense to include the link to the Graffiti Research Lab as related to this incident.
(Mad Gouki 07:40, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  relevant link 

message: Nobody except for G4 has called this "aquagate". The placement of that comment right at the front of the article looks a whole lot like promotion. If it has to be kept, it should be pushed down to the reaction section or somewhere else. 12.96.162.45 15:50, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have moved it down to "Public reaction" as per anon.  —  Rickyrab | Talk 16:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Someone please remove the G4 "aquagate" nonsense 

message: I disagree with the current title, which has been changed to "Boston Aqua Teen ad campaign security scare" as of this writing.  My suggestion is Boston lightboard security scare or revert back to the name we were using yesterday.  The complete name of the show they were advertising for is Aqua Teen Hunger Force, why is it being truncated to just Aqua Teen?  I cannot find this discussion anywhere.  (jarbarf) 16:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I find the current title very unwieldy. "Ad campaign" is redundant; "ad" alone would be sufficient. Either the full "Aqua Teen Hunger Force" name should be used or its acronym, ATHF. Personally, I prefer using the word "Mooninite" since that's what the ads depicted. Xuanwu 16:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the current title is not good, since it shortens the name of the show. I don't have a suggestion, but consensus was not reached before this change was made. Leebo86 16:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Why not just call it the "Boston Mooninite ad security scare" or simply the "Boston marketing security scare"?  —  Rickyrab | Talk 16:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: At the very least we need to stop changing the title every few hours (it seems like that anyway). I'd suggest going back to be Boston Security Scare (or something like it) and then have a discussion to try and reach consensus on what the title should be. I'd also rather see "adult swim" rather than "aqua teen" anything. The character involved was from the show, but the decision-makers in all the events were not. 12.96.162.45 16:31, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have downsized the title. Now let's work on a consensus.  —  Rickyrab | Talk 16:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it would have been better to reach consensus before moving it once again, Rickyrab, because every time it gets moved we end up with redirects pointing to redirects and so on. We shouldn't move again until a consensus is reached. Leebo86 16:44, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I edited the redirects involved. Yes, it was a headache, but it was done.  —  Rickyrab | Talk 17:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Mooninite attack on Boston? — Omegatron 17:05, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it sure as heck beats Boston Aqua Teen Party!  —  Rickyrab | Talk 17:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I like "Boston Mooninite ad scare" and "Boston Adult Swim ad scare" best, but it was also a bomb scare or a security scare in that ads were mistaken for explosive devices. Moreover, I noticed that folks seem to think a lot of this incident as "the nonsense that shut down Boston", or something along those lines.  —  Rickyrab | Talk 17:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well it's been changed again, this time by User:Psoreilly. I disagree with the move to 2007 Boston Mooninite Scare, because the panic was not caused because people were worried about mooninites, it was caused because they felt there was a security issue. Leebo86 17:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: concur and with parent RE "bomb" or "security" Mike wiki 18:07, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

text: How about "Boston Advertising Security Scare" with a redirect from "31 January Boston Security Scare". Here I'm trying to suggest the uniqueness of this incident as being related to Advertising and taking place in Boston, while allowing for its basic nature as a Boston Security Scare (that can be identified as taking place on January 31st). Mike wiki 18:20, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I commented below that I like "Boston advertising security scare" (note the lower case words, which is the standard since it's not a proper noun). Leebo86 18:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, I thought it might be considered a name, but I guess it isn't any more so than the Russian constitutional crisis of 1993. With that consideration, I suggest shuffling the words to Advertising security scare in Boston so that we can get two capped words in there.Mike wiki 18:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Title change

message: When you've finished moving the page, would you fancy clearing up the stacked redirects you've left in your path. They're getting 2 & 3 levels deep :( --Tagishsimon (talk)
:I think I got them all.--Isotope23 20:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirects to clear up

message: I just accidentally blanked the page. Fixing it now... sorry about that folks... Hiberniantears 19:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that was just one of the pages that redirects here. Someone reverted it. Not a big deal. Leebo86 19:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks Leebo.Hiberniantears 20:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Leebo didn't do it. I did. But thanks for noticing anyhow. 204.52.215.107 20:27, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What are you talking about?  I did it.  24.224.154.12 23:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Blank 

message: FYI: Until a neutral title is agreed upon, I've move-protected the page.  --tomf688 (talk - email) 20:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Temporary move protect 

message: Is anyone here a member? D4S 20:55, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikiproject Boston 

message: Although I don't think the mention of webcomic coverage adds very much to the article, just checked Dinosaur comics and there doesn't appear to be a comic related to the mooninites scare as the articles says Melander 22:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Something Positive did put up a comic related to the issue. Since the author of that comic is a Boston resident, it qualifies as "Public Reaction." Remove the Dinosaur Comics mention, though - he only puts it in his blog, not the comic itself. Comics are suitable as references, as they're works of art. Blogs, in general, are not. Xuanwu 22:23, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Webcomics 

message: http://www.bpdnews.com/2007/02/message_from_the_police_commis_2.html is a message from the police commissioner regarding the events.  it's intended for internal police department consumption rather than as a public statement, but it's still an interesting read to put it into context.  not sure where in the main article it should appear, so i figured i'd put it on the talk page for someone to integrate if appropriate.
 66.92.68.224 23:46, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice find ˉˉanetode╦╩ 02:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  internal police reaction, including timeline 

message: The account of events in Chicago is missing some detail.  Two people working for interference were detained briefly by police for taking the signs down. The police account says that they declined to say who they were working for (interference). They were not arrested. 65.117.65.184 23:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicago reaction 

message: Alright, trying to avoid OR here, but after putting everything together it appears that intial reaction has to do with a train station in Washington, D.C. closing due to a suspious package and the reason for the "sinster looking device...it has batteries and wires," came from a fake pipe bomb (according to news sources I've read and Ed Davis' public police report). Any ideas? Yanksox 13:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The BPD's initial reaction to the call from an MBTA employee may have had nothing to do with DHS activities in DC. I've not yet come accross a source that said that the DHS posted some sort of nationwide notice to police departments to be on the lookout for bomb-like devices - though that very well may have been the case. The question is, would the BPD have reacted differently to news of a suspicious device if a similar event had not occured earlier that morning in DC? ˉˉanetode╦╩ 14:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is too much speculation on our part, the Boston Globe or Herald will probably have something that will allow us to source information. Yanksox 16:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Not to mention that I, for one, don't know what the "normal" level of DHS notifications to police and local authorities are.  It could be that the above actually comprise an extremely slow day or this could be a once-a-year occurrence.  Definitely be on the lookout for follow-up on those items, though.  Bitnine 18:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

text: There was an article in the Boston Hearld talking about fake pipe bombs being found on the same day in Boston. . Has anyone else seen anything denying or disproving this report? If there were other devices found the same day unrelated to the advertising in Boston, it seems important. 65.117.65.184 23:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Police Comissioner's message above indeed mentions that a call was made at 1:02 p.m. New England Medical Center Security saying that a pipe bomb had been found in a desk drawer in their building. This call was after the morning I-93 closing and much of the initial reaction, but immediately before the 'devices' were discovered at the bottom of bridges. Bitnine 23:13, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putting it together 

message: Is it worth mentioning that this incident boosted the TV ratings of Aqua Teen Hunger Force?
(Source)
--Amanojyaku 04:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, that article labels Err as Ignignokt. Bitnine 05:01, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I've alreadly seen (from a quick glance) a typo (in the caption) and a grammatical error. Yanksox 12:31, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Since you have a source, go ahead and add it in. I'd also recommend adding that to the ATHF Wiki page. Xuanwu 06:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Today's Boston Globe had an article that said initially ratings went DOWN 100K (day of incident) before returning to normal the next day. They mentioned Neilsen #s. Jjaazz 14:43, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Reading the quoted article, it was up 4% because the prior nite was down.  I don't feel it is worthy of adding. Jjaazz 14:44, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Found source (Source) "Though the Cartoon Network received considerable attention after the scare, there appears to have been no short-term payoff. Viewership for the first "Aqua Teen" episode to air after the incident was down 100,000 viewers, compared to the night before, then only rebounded to its average rating the following night, according to Nielsen Media Research, which monitors television viewership." Jjaazz 14:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  TV Ratings? 

message: I put some references to the widespread  phenomenon  of this super mario question block last year, in the context of the generation gap and reaction.
It is so eriely similar I was struck by it. Although the whole point of that exercise was anti-commercial as well as anti-paranoia I wonder if the Ad Company knew of it (they love to co-opt everything). It has interesting implications for the charges filed.68.60.68.203 15:53, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Mario Question Block Hysteria  

message: added some early reports from the scene which indicate that the police refused to describe  the suspicious "packages" being destroyed claiming ongoing investigation, and continued to keep the public in the dark about what they were finding until after several further incidents-seems bizarre to me68.60.68.203 16:01, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Police knew but werent telling 

message: There are some new stories not yet covered by the article. The most important is that its been admitted now that Berdovsky videotaped the police during the incident but didn't tell the police that the device was not a bomb. They caught him at the scene on surveillance cameras.
Berdovsky being at the scene and later sending out emails to people (supposedly on behalf of interference) telling them not to say anything about the devices need to be fit into the timeline. 
There is an account of it (from his lawyers) at 
In brief:
- He claims to have rushed with a video camera to the bomb scene early in the morning as part of his normal activities as a freelance video artist.
- After taping the incident, he admits to realizing what was going on. He did not contact the police but rather returned to his apartment. He then called his employer who he says told him "they would take care of it".
- He then according to other previous accounts sent out email to other members of his community who knew about the devices telling them to say nothing about them. His friends think that he represented himself as doing what interference told him to do.
12.96.162.45 23:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New material about Berdovasky 

message: Do they deserve their own page? There has been enuf said about them during this incident... Jjaazz 02:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. There is little information about them available and they have no other notability. 12.96.162.45 21:52, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I thought I had read something about founder of company and how he had done this guerrilla marketing thing for a while.... Just an idea... Jjaazz 00:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you can find enough material unrelated to the boston incident, it would be ok. As a start I would suggest using  and. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.96.162.45 (talk) 17:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Seems someone added text to main article, though it seems out of place. Jjaazz 17:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interference, Inc. 

message: From paragraph 3 of "The Incident":
The first media reports that the event was a hoax occurred around 1 p.m.
Event is vague, and was should be qualified: '...reports claiming or speculating that the LED signs were part of a hoax...'
--AC 10:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The word "hoax" should not appear in this article, apart from when quoting a media source that used that word. It's simply too POV a way to describe what happened, since it whether it was a hoax has yet to be legally determined. Xuanwu 20:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I think there's real potential for a countersuit against various outlets for libel.  I'm amazed to watch news clips where they show the video of placing the signs and then say "this videos shows the individuals allegedly placing the hoax devices."  I think the "allegedly placing" part is just funny since there's a video to prove it, but the "hoax" part is where all the legal problems arise and there are no qualifiers there.  "Hoax" is not only POV, but also a legal concern and we should definitely avoid the word as a description of what happened.  --Aranae 20:56, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Incident:  Hoax reports 

message: See 
Someone removed this information without comment so I'm leaving it here so that its preserved if removed again. The devices created/used in the incident look like knock offs of devices promoted earlier by the Graffic Research Lab. GRL provides instructions at their site as to how to construct the device which looks similar to the one used by interference. I can't find anyone promoting this type of sign other than GRL before interference subverted it for advertising purposes. 12.96.162.45 19:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Graffiti Research Lab and their Night Writer 

message: Looking around google, I can't find an absolute confirmation that he entered the US as a political refugee. I also looked around his own web pages and didn't find anything. Can someone offer up a reference to where his refugee status is confirmed. His being from Belerus and the nature of the government of that country on their own are not confirmation.12.96.162.45 19:40, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berdovksy's political refugee status 

message: I've been assisting Bmtpromo in uploading this photo, and he's having trouble adding it. 
Could someone who is more active in updating the article add it? I haven't contributed to the article recently, so I figured I'd share it here before inserting it. It needs an appropriate caption too. Leebo86 19:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Los Angeles light picture 

message: Jim Samples resigned today which is too bad because he himself did nothing wrong. Mike Lazzo and Keith Crofford are likely soon to be gone too. 12.96.162.45 20:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2007 Adult Swim Massacre might be a better name in a couple weeks. 12.96.162.45 20:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that would be a poor name.  The marketing campaign wasn't a newsworthy event.  It was a contributing cause to a newsworthy event.  The newsworthy event was the scare. Capedia 17:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Head of Cartoon Network is gone because of the incident 

message: The devices were pretty much flat.  There was nowhere to hide any explosives, except possibly in the batteries but (1) the fact that the lights were operating pretty much proved that the batteries were, in fact, batteries, and (2) even if the batteries had been pure C4, it would not have been enough to cause significant damage to anything.  Any bomb squad member who was actually qualified for the job should have taken no more than 30 seconds to completely dismiss any possibility that these were IEDs.
I'm not going to add this to the article without a solid citation, but if somebody can find one, I believe it is vital to an understanding of what happened and why.  The advertizers are really guilty only of failing to realize that public officials can be incompetent to the degree manifested in this incident. Chicago tried to warn them, but they didn't believe it.  Oops.  Capedia 17:33, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "suspicious devices"? 

message: 
Since there isn't really a consensus yet as to what this page should be named, I think in the meantime it should be moved to 2007 Boston Mooninite scare, as scare is not a proper noun and should not be capitalized as per WP:CAPS. :: ZJH (T C E) 15:56, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (clearing EPP requests) That's reasonable, at least.  I've moved it to fix the capitalisation.  This doesn't make the new location the final location, I have no desire to get involved in that. Proto ► 20:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't expecting you to get involved in that. I don't even want to be involved in it! ;) :: ZJH (T C E) 20:49, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: That would assume that "Boston Mooninite Scare" is the specific name of the event, but it doesn't have any sort of official name, so it shouldn't be capitalized. :: ZJH (T C E) 19:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Moving 

message: Another scare in Boston, this time involving traffic counter devices.  This is sure to make its rounds through the transportation engineering circuit, but I felt I'd pass it on here in case anyone felt it was notable enough for this article: http://www.myfoxboston.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail?contentId=2527658&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1
*  “The consultant didn’t have permission to set the counters”
* “It looks like a private firm may be to blame.”
* “The rubber bands [tubes] stretched across the street were set with some kind of pistol [ramset].”
* “Anything that’s not there every day is suspicious.”
* “No word from the police yet if the consultant will face any fines.”
Enjoy! --Thisisbossi 04:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yesterday afternoon, I put in a blurb about that. :) Karrmann 11:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Ahh, so you did.  Thanks! --Thisisbossi 12:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Traffic Counter Scare 

message: Actually, it's not. MGlosenger 02:21, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reason for protection against moves listed on the 'list of protected articles' page? 

message: It's been more than a month; I think we can safely remove the  tag now.... -Mysekurity 18:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Current"? 

message: lite-brites are bombs. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.201.174.176 (talk) 04:35, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The talk page is not a place to dicuss article-irrelevent topics. I would suggest the Adult Swim forums if you wish to discuss your feelings on the subject. The Bone III 03:02, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  In a a world gone mad... 

message: It seems like everyone and their mothers were cited in this article, especially the public reaction section. The quotes from the 20 different bloggers, G4 and NY Times really don't need to be there. Infact from what I read, it appears to me that G4 applied their own little marketing scheme to this article. Please trim this up. If anything, it should be the publics reaction to the devices, not the police's reaction. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.212.199.222 (talk) 04:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive number of oppinions. 

message: So the sense I've gotten from reading news articles about the scare is that the signs were generally described by authorities in more ambiguous terms -- unknown device, potential bomb, etc.; now, out of an abundance of caution, bomb squads generally treat such things as if they were bombs, but I don't think the current article lead (stating unambiguously that the devices were seen as bombs) is accurate. --192.18.128.13 21:12, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I dunno...I think if someone was going to put a bomb somewhere now, making it look like an ad for an upcoming movie would make it less likely to get reported.  Just because you would do it one way doesn't mean everyone would. --PatrickD (talk) 18:42, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What you are saying is exactly what I mean, you want to make bombs look like normal objects, not quirky LED finger-blocks.--154.5.61.233 (talk) 07:05, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I personally try and make all my bombs look like scale modle replicas of dubya, in the hope he visits boston soon. --82.35.192.193 (talk) 01:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if you put peaches on structural areas of bridges and on signs around Boston to advertise your fruit stand, if people would be like "oh my god, there's an unknown biological device! WMDs!" and force the police to have them jettisoned into space. I would understand if it just created a bomb scare; but when they located them, to spend millions of dollars blowing them up, then shutting down every major city in the country? It makes me sick that everyone in the media, even the smallest fish in the pond, all defend the Boston PD's actions. --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 16:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  were the signs ever actually identified by any authority as bombs? 

message: i.e., those around "Mooninite," seem unnecessary.  The fact that it is referred to as a character and it links to the page on Mooninites seems to perform the quotes' function just fine, making them unnecessary.  They also seem to me to violate NPOV.  Removing barring disagreement. - Waidawut (talk) 19:26, 2 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scare quotes in opening 

message: From the reporting at the time it seemed like the first identification of these as related to ATHF was from a local shopkeeper who had one on her store and phoned the police at the time.  The police seemed totally clueless to the fact that these were not IEDs until well into the evening.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.218.221.152 (talk) 04:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Police Analyst Recognized Device??

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/06/ap/national/mainD8N4BOQG0.shtml
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:12, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:09, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:55:18, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/01/boston.bombscare/
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:12, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:09, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:55:28, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 2 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.bpdnews.com/2007/02/message_from_the_police_commis_2.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:12, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:09, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:55:40, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:56, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 3 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.seattlepi.com/local/302011_devices01.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:12, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:11, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:56:58, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 4 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://web.archive.org/web/20070210222848/http%3A//weblog.infoworld.com/techwatch/archives/010023.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:14, 400 Bad Request
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:12, 400 Bad Request
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:57:08, 400 Bad Request
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 5 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://cbs4boston.com/topstories/local_story_031135507.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:12, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:14, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:57:20, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 6 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://wbztv.com/local/local_story_059122735.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:14, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:14, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:57:29, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 7 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://wbztv.com/topstories/Peter.Berdovsky.Sean.2.587093.html
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-26 02:40:18, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-05-27 14:58:16, 404 Not Found
** In 2007 Boston bomb scare on 2011-06-15 10:58:39, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 10:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 8 

message: Earlier this evening IP 67.82.165.119, without any explanation in edit summaries or on the talk page, made a series of six edits that restored most of the changes that I made yesterday in two edits that:
* remove editorializing and another statement not included in the cited source, stick to the cited source, copyedit)
*  tone this down a bit. stick to the sources. the cited source does not use the word "calamity". nor does it use the terms "panic, fear, strife, unrest, disorder, rioting, wrath, and struggling".
There have been a number of other changes by 67.82.165.119 and reverts by several other editors going back to August 2nd.
I will revert 67.82.165.119's changes again in a few minutes. It is my hope that there will be some discussion here before these changes are restored again.
Here are the two versions with differences shown in bold italics:
67.82.165.119's version                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         	my version
On February 5, 2007 state and local agencies came to an agreement with both Turner Broadcasting and Interference, Inc. to pay for costs incurred in this calamity. As part of the settlement, which resolves every civil and criminal claim towards the panic, fear, strife, unrest, disorder, wrath, rioting, and anarchy, Turner and Interference agreed to pay $2 million — $1 million to go towards the Boston Police Department and $1 million towards the Department of Homeland Security. The two organizations did this because local authorities deemed their initial apologies not enough as announced by Dan Conley, who is the District Attorney for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, in a speech on NWCN saying the people who are responsible for this "reckless stunt", are liable for the havoc it caused to both the city and the region. Also, as an unfortunate result, on February 9, 2007, the week after the commotion occurred, Cartoon Network's original manager, Jim Samples, resigned from being in charge of Cartoon Network in order to avoid criminal liability, to make up for this disaster, and to let everybody who use to work for him move on. And shortly after his resignation, one of his employees, Stuart Snyder, took over his position as the manager, and has been controlling Cartoon Network since that time.	On February 5, 2007 state and local agencies came to an agreement with both Turner Broadcasting and Interference, Inc. to pay for costs incurred in the incident. As part of the settlement, which resolves any potential civil or criminal claims against the companies, Turner and Interference agreed to pay $2 million — $1 million to go towards the Boston Police Department and $1 million towards the Department of Homeland Security. This is in addition to the companies' apologies which local authorities deemed too little as announced by Dan Conley, District Attorney for Suffolk County, Massachusetts, in a speech on NWCN saying the people who are responsible for this "reckless stunt", are liable for the havoc it caused to both the city and the region. Also, on February 9, 2007, the week after the commotion occurred, Cartoon Network's original manager, Jim Samples, resigned "in recognition of the gravity of the situation that occurred under my watch" and with the "hope that my decision allows us to put this chapter behind us and get back to our mission of delivering unrivaled original animated entertainment for consumers of all ages".
:--Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 02:27, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Budding edit war in Aftermath section 

message: Does this title- bomb SCARE- violate NPOV? The article seems to open up directly on a negative tone. However, at the same time, if that is how the event is normally referred to outside of Wikipedia, I guess it would be considered neutral . . .
Also, there seems to be undue weight with regard to the excessive comments made by random, anonymous unimportant people supporting the seemingly comical "joke" of planting these look-alike bombs - which also creates this unequal balance and skews NPOV towards a more biased ending in favour of what these Berdovsky and Stevens accomplished. The article seems to be retain a slight bias in the favour of Berdovsky and Stevens and seems to - again, slightly, inadvertently mock the Boston Police and those seriously disturbed by the incident. Are the comments by anonymous individuals even reliable/verifiable? 
Serenabergs1990 (talk) 18:10, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, I'd change the title to "2007 Boston 'bomb' scare".  "hoax" nothing.  No one made any threats or even any suggestions of threats.  Just because people panicked when they saw something they didn't recognize is no reason for the cops to get clueless. - Denimadept (talk) 21:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV VIOLATION? UNDUE WEIGHT? 

message: Added side-by-side of Lite-Brite to the article.
Cheers,
— Cirt (talk) 22:19, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Added side-by-side of [[Lite-Brite]] 

message: Page name moved to 2007 Boston Mooninite panic.
;Page move to 2007 Boston Mooninite panic rationale explained
#Previously was "2007 Boston bomb scare".
#However I looked for a definition of the phrase "bomb scare".
#There is no article on "bomb scare" on Wikipedia.
#But "bomb scare" redirects to bomb threat.
#The first sentence of the article bomb threat says: "A bomb threat is generally defined as a threat, usually verbal or written, to detonate an explosive or incendiary device to cause property damage, death, or injuries, whether or not such a device actually exists."
#There was no bomb.
#There was no threat.
#Therefore it is inappropriate to have "bomb scare", or "bomb", or "threat" in the title of this article.
Thank you,
— Cirt (talk) 22:42, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  2007 Boston Mooninite panic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on 2007 Boston Mooninite panic. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/5wiHv0izT?url=http%3A%2F%2Farstechnica.com%2Fnews.ars%2Fpost%2F20070508-mooninites-meet-the-terrorist-hoax-improvements-act.html to http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070508-mooninites-meet-the-terrorist-hoax-improvements-act.html
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) 14:58, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified