Talk:4chan

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 4chan article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18: 2 months

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

4chan is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 14, 2009.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
November 14, 2004	Articles for deletion	Kept
February 16, 2006	Articles for deletion	Kept
August 11, 2007	Good article nominee	Not listed
August 19, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
September 6, 2008	Peer review	Reviewed
September 23, 2008	Featured article candidate	Promoted
May 14, 2022	Featured article review	Demoted
Current status: Former featured article

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This is not a forum for general discussion of 4chan.
Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.
All additions to the article require reliable sources for verification. Even the additions you want to make. Wikipedia does not accept original research; if you believe something to be true, you must be able to prove it.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting.

Websites: Computing Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

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

Spoken Wikipedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spoken Wikipedia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that are spoken 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.Spoken WikipediaWikipedia:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaTemplate:WikiProject Spoken WikipediaSpoken Wikipedia

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Ling, Justin (May 26, 2022). "Who Owns 4chan?". Wired. Condé Nast.

you should add the theat against stortinget to the article

2 bomb threats was posted against stortinget on april 2th. source: nrk. links can not be possted however. i did try. 84.208.108.74 (talk) 11:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added the information to the article. TurboSuperA+ (☏) 14:29, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Excuse me, but I would like to request to edit this page. 50.39.228.27 (talk) 15:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done This is not the right page to request additional user rights.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding /bant/

It was created in 2017, not 2014. Source: [1]https://www.4chan.org/blotter. Please fix. 65.92.98.176 (talk) 18:25, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

edited, waiting for approval. Ven3u69 (talk) 15:51, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding 4chan being hacked

I know not much information has come out around the VERY recent hacking, but keep in mind this would be trivial to include in the article, once more info comes out. Qrunch2 (talk) 10:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They leaked the ENTIRE SOURCE CODE and doxxed ALL THE MODS

4chan is --> was? The site is down now

Also the last thing posted was CHICKEN JOCKEY DatChernobylGuy (talk) 10:27, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Sun just published this article.

But still, I don't think that's enough. Better wait. Katsumi a.k.a. Upperdecker2562 (talk) 11:48, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See below for not including The Sun, as it is not a reliable source. Knitsey (talk) 13:08, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. Katsumi a.k.a. Upperdecker2562 (talk) 15:13, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I remember that Wikipedia editors are the hugest dunces in the world when they lock articles to “protect against vandalism” but can’t be assed to add up to date information, meanwhile shit like the Ukraine war or Hamas-Israel conflict gets constant updates and corrections regardless of “source reliability”

Add this shit to the article, the website is going down, soyjak.party unironically won. 69.9.82.206 (talk) 18:06, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the site was shut down yes but the hacker isnt related to soyjak party at all. they are foodists who ruin articles with false advertisement, so should be deleted. Whiteingale andrew (talk) 19:32, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The leak of admin emails contains numerous.edu domains but no .gov. Emails. I’ve seen this repeated multiple times since last night but have the list in front of me, that’s not accurate info. 2600:387:F:5E15:0:0:0:8 (talk) 18:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KnowYourMeme

@Knitsey: reliability of a source is dependent on context and I'm 99% sure KnowYourMeme is reliable enough for information I added. MinervaNeue (talk) 12:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A major site being down needs reliable sourcing. This isn't a trivial issue. Can I suggest you take it to the article talk page, there is a thread already started there. Many thanks, Knitsey (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I thought this was a response on your talk page. I'm a humpty. Sorry about that. Knitsey (talk) 13:01, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As this is a major issue for 4chan, this would need reliable sources for its inclusion. The sources you added are user generated and are completely unsuitable for the claims, especially when including the username you added. Knitsey (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then can it be shortened to just "On 15th April 2025, 4chan was hacked." before there's reliable enough sourcing? MinervaNeue (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It still needs reliable sources. There is a suggestion above that The Sun article should be included, but The Sun (United Kingdom) is also unreliable. This list is not exhaustive, but might help Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Knitsey (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you should find a reliable source instead of just deleting the information. 4chan is obviously down and mainstream media is widely reporting on the leak. 149.167.186.203 (talk) 14:42, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:BURDEN. Knitsey (talk) 14:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was no reason you couldn't have just left a tag for needing a better citation. Taking it upon yourself to remove the information which was obviously true is a great example of Wikipedia editors have a reputation for being such dogmatic, unreasonable, prissy nerds. 149.167.186.203 (talk) 15:06, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can I remind you of Wikipedia:No personal attacks. The information in the edit was of such a nature, site shut down, named editors etc, that suitable sources were needed. This has now been done by another editor. We return to the onus being on the editor adding the info. There wasn't any rush, Wikipedia isn't a source for breaking news, especially when unverified. Knitsey (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get that you're obsessed with WP:RS, but WP:COMMONSENSE should also apply. When a global site like 4chan goes down and it's being discussed all over the internet, maybe you don't need to act like a digital hall monitor. Nobody’s saying rely solely on KnowYourMeme, but nuking the whole thing instead of tagging it is ridiculous. 149.167.186.203 (talk) 15:24, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why am I not surprised looking at your contributions that 90% of it is reverting other people's edits and then lecturing them on their talk pages?

See WP:KYM. It is user generated and is generally not considered a suitable source.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:33, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, generally. It's enough for the simple fact of being hacked. MinervaNeue (talk) 19:26, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]