Talk:Doxing/Archive 1

The rules of a particular website, with regards to doxing, aren't really relevant to this article. I've removed this section. C p mcdowell (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Some moron added a false claim that Gamergate harasses its opponents and cited The Guardian as proof. Notably absent is any of the thousands of times that social justice nazis have harassed and doxxed anyone who questioned their monstrous ideology. 67.186.249.102 (talk) 23:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

For the benefit of editors who are actually WP:HERE:

• Be WP:CIVIL and avoid name-calling (such as 'moron').
• Relatedly we have a policy of WP:No personal attacks which specifically deems it unacceptable to refer to others as 'nazis'.
• Wikipedia strives for WP:Verifiability, not truth so whether a claim may actually be true or false is beside the point.
• Relatedly, Wikipedia relies not on proof, but rather on sources that are WP:RELIABLE.
• Talk pages such as this one are WP:NOTAFORUM but rather for discussing improvement of the article.

As such editors are welcome to suggest reliable sources with information relevant to the topic at hand. Happy editing. Lklundin (talk) 12:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

There's an easy way to fix this. Just find WP:RS that either states that GamerGate does not dox, or counter with evidence that anti-GG/Feminists/etc do. Wikipedia is bound by their own rules, or at least, they claim to be... so it should be easy enough to counter the bull shit with reliable sources of our own. It's not like feminists/anti-GGers look for factual sources, just "reliable" ones anyway... --Lithorien (talk) 03:21, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

This has come up before. There are sources for "document tracing" (despite them not being cited here), but I think those are a minority and may have a single origin that isn't at all connected to those who first began using the term. I think we can all agree "doxing" involves some version of "documents" ("docs"), but everything beyond that seems like speculation. Until we can figure out if there's an intelligible origin or consensus emerges about what the body of reliable sources say, I've just gone ahead and cut it out. The version I removed also included the part of speech (that it's "the verb form..."), which might be appropriate as part of an etymology section, but not the lead because Wikipedia is about concepts not, as a general principle, words. --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 23:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Doxing: An Etymology has relevant information, including the verb form. The Atlantic is an RS. The article claims information was gleaned from Know Your Meme, which I consider pretty reliable but is maybe not a reliable source by WP. There is also an On the Media article THE PROBLEM WITH "DOXXING" that has useful information. --Mark viking (talk) 23:33, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

I've added a reference that is vetted by Oxford University Press, so no need to depend upon KnowYourMeme. The Atlantic an On the Media sources could be used for a short WP:WORDISSUBJECT etymology section that expanded on that aspect of the topic, though; those references show that there's some encyclopedic "social or historical significance" for the word itself. Diego (talk) 17:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I've added a reference that is vetted by Oxford University Press, so no need to depend upon KnowYourMeme. The Atlantic an On the Media sources could be used for a short WP:WORDISSUBJECT etymology section that expanded on that aspect of the topic, though; those references show that there's some encyclopedic "social or historical significance" for the word itself. Diego (talk) 17:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

I'll vote here to submit that this term may have originated from the software industry, there's a rather popular tool that developers sometimes use which allows "official-looking" documentation to be automatically created by directly feeding the source code in and out comes the code description ALMOST immediately suitable for publishing. (Most developers HATE "wasting time" generating documentation, and this tool was viewed as a godsend.) It's called "Doxygen" and it's still available up on sourceforge.net, and it certainly got lots of people referring to creating documents as "doxing" and in approximately the correct timeframe, but at best it's an "educated guess" that it's where this term originated, but I believe it's better than most that I've heard. Jlawton11 (talk) 02:55, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

"Doxing (from dox, abbreviation of documents[1]) or doxxing[2][3] is the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting private or identifiable information"

I stopped right there because my bullshit threshold had already been exceeded. Anything that can be researched by an unprivileged person on the internet is by definition not private.

49.196.0.121 (talk) 09:20, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

I would like to see a new section added that either provides advice about protecting yourself from doxxing and online harassment (if an article already exists already perhaps important points could be moved in and then a see also template placed at the top of the section--I'm new here and haven't found this yet) or at least a link within the see also section to said article. Additionally, if this article exists, I would love to see it. I want to do some research for appropriate sources that cover this topic to help Wikipedians stay safe on here. Here is one suggested source, although I think that the nature of its URL may make it not meet neutrality requirements (please advise):

Friedman, Jaclyn; Anita, Sarkeesian; Sherman, Renee Bracey (July 5, 2018). "Speak Up & Stay Safe(r): A Guide to Protecting Yourself From Online Harassment". Feminist Frequency. Archived from the original on November 25, 2018. Retrieved November 28, 2018. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |dead-url= ignored (|url-status= suggested) (help)

I'm getting this from their own news coverage links, so perhaps this isn't adequate evidence of widespread coverage in reliable third party sources to give this page more authority, but here is a list of third party coverage which may give credence to this as a potential source to write said section:

• Reynolds, Emily (December 10, 2015). "This Feminist Frequency guide helps you fight harassment". WIRED. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Ravenscraft, Eric (December 9, 2015). "This Site Teaches You to Prepare For and Deal With Online Harassment". Lifehacker. Retrieved November 28, 2018. - (seems to be arguably a one-paragraph mention basically a "retweet" of someone else's coverage listed next in the list).
• Opam, Kwame (December 8, 2015). "Feminist Frequency launches practical guide to defend against online harassment". THE VERGE. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Frank, Allegra (December 8, 2015). "Feminist Frequency launches online harassment safety guide: Best practices for staying secure on the internet". Polygon. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Dupere, Katie (December 11, 2015). "New guide for feminists shows how to handle haters and trolls". Mashable. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Jusino, Teresa (December 9, 2015). "Feminist Frequency Joins Fellow Activists in Creating a Guide to Defend Against Online Harassment". The Mary Sue. Retrieved November 28, 2018. - I've never heard of this one, but it's a similar "retweet" of the The Verge coverage above.
• Collins, Terry (December 24, 2015). "Online abuse isn't going away, but you're not helpless to fight it: Anita Sarkeesian, who has gotten death threats since calling out sexism in video-game culture last year, has teamed up with two other women to create a guide to combat online harassment". CNET. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Bracey Sherman, Renee (December 15, 2015). "Finally, Someone Created a Guide to Help Protect You from Noxious Trolls: Three women who have weathered doxxing, harassment, and rape and death threats are now helping others stay safe online". Broadly. Vice. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Beschizza, Rob (December 9, 2015). "How to stay safe online". Boing Boing. Retrieved November 28, 2018.
• Frank, Allegra (September 25, 2015). "Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn and more take aim at cyber harassment against women". Polygon. Retrieved November 28, 2018. - Quote from this one: The Broadband Commission Working Group on Gender gathered at the United Nations yesterday to present its findings on what they consider to be a 'rising tide of online violence against women and girls.' in which the authors spoke at the UN to help advise them on protecting women and girls from online harassment and offer their point of view.

There's also a handful of interviews with them, but I realize those are primary sources and less appropriate unless they're providing full clarification for what third-party, authoritative, secondary sources are articulating (if I understand this all correctly--I'm new here).

Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 03:56, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Should this page (and similar pages) contain best practice guidelines for protection from doxxing (or harassment online and offline)? See above for my specific proposal. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 03:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

No, WP:NOTHOWTO. Also, why has this gone straight to a full-blown thirty-day formal RfC? Have all of the suggestions at WP:RFCBEFORE been exhausted? --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Redrose64, I'm new here, so if you like I can delete the RfC and use the edit history to ping other editors of this page to begin with. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 19:37, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Tired. I realize I'm asking for something that's against the content policies, since Wikipedia is not a how to. Therefore, including said information--even the intended parroting of what others say--is not OK. I'm going to ping anyway with the assumption that this is just a no go, but with the intention of additional clarification and feedback or dialog being provided by others who may know more about the project than me and have fruitful suggestions of over areas I can contribute along these lines. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 19:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

As per page stats on https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Doxing I'm pinging a handful of the main contributors to this page (except for the scary one that's banned for harassment omg): Rhododendrites, Tutelary, Adrian J. Hunter. Sorry to bother you, but I'm trying to get some redirection or clarification in line with the above short discussion I had with Redrose. Is there somewhere else where this content would be appropriate (for instance, about a month ago I think I recall seeing a page that gave advice to Wikipedians, "internally", on how not to have your public identity exposed)? I expect that the answer is 'no' (but I'm a new editor and learning here) unless either of us have misunderstood each other. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 20:09, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Only time for a cursory response now; I'll follow up later. I think we should separate doxing and harassment in terms of this thread, since "protection against harassment" is a massive subject that reaches into legal, psychological, sociological, etc. topics. Figuring out a single encyclopedic subject that would encompass that seems difficult outside of discussing the subject of harassment itself and the various subtypes linked from that article. Doxing is more specific, though, as one form of harassment. We wouldn't want just a list of best practices, as Redrose64 said, or a how-to guide. That's just not what Wikipedia is for (there are lots of things that are useful but lie outside of the scope of the Wikipedia project). That said, there are a whole lot of sources on related subjects that we should cover somewhere (if we don't already). We do have articles like Internet privacy, information privacy, and cyberbullying, for example. Think about how you would frame the subject if we were explaining to a general audience about the topic, not trying to tell someone what to do or how to do it. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:04, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Rhododendrites, for taking the time to help me think through this critically. I'm going to take the time to reflect on this, read the articles you linked to, and jot down some notes. Looking forward to your followup. Sincerely, Shashi Sushila Murray, (message me) 02:59, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

rymes with "boxing" as in 'beat them up'. in modern vigilantisim there is no provision for measure or forgiveness.

this makes doxing typical of anti christian radicalism in which forgivness ot tolerance are forgotten in favpr of primitive sensational blood lust. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.94.232.100 (talk) 16:42, 24 January 2019 (UTC)