This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Journalism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet culture Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Internet culture To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles Expand : Pick an article from here or here Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images Stubs : All stubs are located here Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}} See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention Libraries Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Media Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments Sweden Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sweden, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sweden-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SwedenWikipedia:WikiProject SwedenTemplate:WikiProject SwedenSweden Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Internet Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Websites: Computing High‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computing. Politics Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Freedom of speech Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Cryptography: Computer science Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cryptography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CryptographyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptographyTemplate:WikiProject CryptographyCryptography Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Computer science (assessed as Low-importance). Espionage Low‑importance WikiLeaks is within the scope of WikiProject Espionage, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of espionage, intelligence, and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, or contribute to the discussion.EspionageWikipedia:WikiProject EspionageTemplate:WikiProject EspionageEspionage Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

@Cambial Yellowing I partial reverted [1], why are the Daily Dot articles questionable? Softlem (talk) 22:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus has determined it to be questionable for the reasons given at the time it was raised. It certainly ought not to be relied upon for contentious statements of fact. Cambial — foliar❧ 22:59, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus has determined The RSP you cite says There is no consensus.

It does not say It certainly ought not to be relied upon for contentious statements of fact. It says there is community consensus that attribution should be used in topics where the source is known to be biased or when the source is used to support contentious claims of fact. Why do you think the statements are contentious? If it is we can attribute it like the RSP you cite says Softlem (talk) 23:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We could, but given that this appears to be the only source which makes certain claims, it's more appropriate not to give this slightly dubious source excessive weight in the article. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I ask again. Why do you think the statements are contentious?

Why is it WP:DUBIOUS? it is not unlikely, particularly difficult to verify, ambiguous and open to interpretation, and no RS makes different claims

Why is it WP:QUESTIONABLE It is not widely acknowledged as extremist, promotional in nature, or rely heavily on rumors and personal opinions Softlem (talk) 23:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, the Daily Beast is not regarded as a high-quality and reliable source, particularly for statements of fact about living people. Cambial — foliar❧ 23:38, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You did not answer. Please stop ignoring questions.

About Daily Beast, you were blocked for that edit warring last time with no consensus and nothing has changed

And WikiLeaks is not a living person, BLP does not apply to the organisations Twitter account [2] does it? Softlem (talk) 23:44, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some instances have other sources, so the use of low-quality sources is redundant. Others make claims not reported on by any other sources, not even by better sources (such as Wired) that focus on tech/cyber reporting and that closely reported on WikiLeaks. We ought not to give undue weight to 1 source lacking a strong rep for reliability. Cambial — foliar❧ 02:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop Ignoring or refusing to answer good faith questions from other editors. You have cited things and said they had consensus for things they did not. You mention other policies that do not seem supported and are not answering about it Softlem (talk) 10:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s time to stop making false claims that I’m ignoring questions. What you mean is that I’m not answering them the way you want. That's not on me. Cambial — foliar❧ 13:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We should be using mainstream news organisations with strong reputations, not shoestring sites with little or no evidence of editorial oversight and disagreement on reliability. Hence I replaced e.g. the DailyDot website with The Atlantic. Cambial — foliar❧ 05:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

with little or no evidence of editorial oversight and disagreement on reliability. You described WikiLeaks

Hence I replaced e.g. the DailyDot website with The Atlantic You replaced one source with The Atlantic and removed the others without replacing them, or even adding a ^{[citation needed]} first like I did

And you still havent explained why it is dubious or contentious Softlem (talk) 10:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Read the first and last sentences of your own comment. Your posts are becoming absurd. Cambial — foliar❧ 14:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My input is probably not warranted here, but I would like to point out that you are not answering. You call the source "dubious" despite the fact that there is no concensus behind it. Leaving unanswered the question of why you think the statements from the source are questionable. 2001:4C4E:1B89:E500:AD0B:C28F:EED7:21DC (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to point out what you claim, but given it's not true, it's not "pointing out" something but merely making a false claim about the above comments. I agree that such input is not warranted, nor is it productive. Cambial — foliar❧ 20:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article prose mentions "donation" or "donations" 30 times, and extensively covers bank and credit card donations, and the ectensive efforts of various state and financial entities to stop or halt such payment channels to WikiLeaks. Yet it makes no mention at all of WikiLeaks accepting donations in cryptocurrency.

Odd that. The official website of WikiLeaks, linked as the first item in the "External links" section of the article, clearly indicates that WikiLeaks is set up to receive donations in at least a half dozen digital assets, that do not pass through banks or credit card processing centers. N2e (talk) 16:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MINOR GRAMMAR EDIT:

Line says "times were" - source article uses grammar that I think is correct "instances where" - if not protected I'd have changed it to "times where".

Line in question:

In response to a question in 2010 about whether WikiLeaks would release information that he knew might get someone killed, Assange said that he had instituted a "harm-minimization policy." This meant that people named in some documents might be contacted before publication, but that there were also times were members of WikiLeaks might have "blood on our hands."[50] One member of WikiLeaks told The New Yorker they were initially uncomfortable with Assange's editorial policy but changed her mind because she thought no one had been unjustly harmed.[50] Delicious Edits (talk) 15:24, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. 〜 Askarion ✉ 15:53, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's very necessary to add the announcement about "WikiLeaks is not part of, also have no relations with us Wikipedia" at the top of the page. But I can't find a proper way to add it. So I want to ask others' opinions about this suggestion. Awdqmb (talk) 14:41, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any evidence anyone is confused?--Jack Upland (talk) 01:36, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was a problem many years back with people who clearly were confused posting hostile comments on this talk page: see e.g. this [3] discussion. I'd be surprised if it is still happening now with enough regularity to be an issue though. AndyTheGrump (talk) 01:50, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The word "raided" is mistakenly repeated in the sentence "In March 2009, German police raided raided the offices of Wikileaks Germany and the homes of Theodor Reppe, who owned the registration for WikiLeaks' German domain while searching for evidence of 'distribution of pornographic material'." 2001:16B8:DEF:E100:507E:A9D5:6C00:932C (talk) 05:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Mindmatrix 15:23, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really relevant ? 2600:1700:2120:7DD0:3D7B:12EB:4BE1:F386 (talk) 09:24, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

thats how templates work Softlem (talk) 04:42, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]