Jump to content

Template:Did you know nominations/Bureau 121

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Allen3 talk 18:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

DYK toolbox

Bureau 121

[edit]
(
)

Created by Ekem (talk), 67.70.35.44 (talk). Nominated by George Ho (talk) at 19:04, 20 December 2014 (UTC).

  •  Comment. It appears that Ekem created this article. They have been notified of this Did you know? nomination. (diff) (Bot edit: did I make an error? Report it to my owner!)—Cerabot (talk) 12:03, 30 December 2014 (UTC)
Review: see following
  • New enough. Long enough, 1749 characters. QPQ fulfilled for We'll Never Have to Say Goodbye Again. For the hooks, the main hook is now fine.
  • striking ALT1 since the sources do not accuse 121, only North Korea, it could be the other North Korean cyberwarfare group. For the main hook, is there an explict source saying "secret" unit? No image since Sony hacks not considered.
  • Regarding sources: Inquistr and Daily Mail are definitely questionable as reliable sources and need to be replaced. Daily Beast is a bit questionable as well, a replacement would also be good but not compulsory. Reference 12 to "The Lead. CNN" is a controversial claim that should be backed up with a verifiable source - perhaps the Reference 6, CNN in the article. Reference 3 and 5. Reuters appear to be the same reference.
  • Regarding the article: I am not sure whether 121 and the Dark Seoul Gang blamed for earlier attacks are the same entity, Reference 3, Reuters in fact says 121 has 1,800 members and the DSG has 50 members. An explicit reliable source is needed for this. Reference 8, CNN does not blame 121, but North Korea. Not sure why there is a redlink to Lab 110. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 07:33, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • You can reject ALT2 and use main hook if you want. George Ho (talk) 08:48, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • @George Ho: - that's probably the least of the problems here. But even the main hook has its issues with "secret", as I have said above. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 10:38, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Removed "secret" from main hook. George Ho (talk) 10:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Okay, George Ho. So are you willing to work on the article itself, or are you leaving it to Ekem? After further consideration, I have changed my vote. There are significant problems with the article - after the questionable sources and content are removed, will the article be long enough? I am not sure. I need to see some work being done before reconsidering. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 10:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you all for working on the article to improve it, and thank you,George Ho, for nominating it in the first place. I expanded the article and removed the weaker references as suggested or backed them up. Ekem (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm liking the changes at first glance. I hope to re-review in detail in 24 hours. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 00:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Since the "X" icon means that the nomination has so many problems it has almost no hope of passing DYK, I'm using a more appropriate icon for its current asssessment, so someone doesn't prematurely close the nomination as unsuccessful. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:33, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Great, many issues were settled, @Ekem:, and only a few remain. I propose changing the following -> "According to the American authorities, the RGB manages clandestine operations and ..." / "Prior to the attack at Sony, North Korea was said to have attacked ..." / "The attacks on South Korea were allegedly conducted" / "with cells from Bureau 121 believed to be operating around the world." I also propose removing reference 12. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 12:40, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • I did remove former ref 12 termed unreliable. Current ref 12 had been ref 13 before moving up.@Starship.paint: Ekem (talk) 12:56, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
  • @Ekem: I was talking about current ref 12; but regardless, the WP:V problem with that is now solved, it can be kept. Final (hopefully) problem. This line: Cyber operations are thought to be a cost-effective way for North Korea to maintain a threatening pressure primarily on South Korea, Japan, and the United States Source says North Korea’s primary intelligence collection targets are South Korea, the United States, and Japan. and OCO may be seen as a costeffective way to develop asymmetric, deniable military options. but do not connect the two together. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 13:47, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
  • @Ekem: - I suggest "... asymmetric military option, as well as a means to gather intelligence." starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 01:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Done. Any more suggestions? --George Ho (talk) 01:59, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • After reading the source again, I think it's fine now, thanks. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 02:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • - main hook is GTG. New enough - (created -> nominated) Long enough, 2387 characters. QPQ fulfilled for We'll Never Have to Say Goodbye Again. Article and sourcing is in good shape. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 02:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Bureau_121&oldid=1017698620"