This is thetalk page for discussing improvements to theKim Dotcom article. This isnot a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text.Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome!Learn to edit;get help. Assume good faith Be polite andavoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seekdispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

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

Archives (index):1,2Auto-archiving period:2 months

The subject of this article iscontroversial 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, use the talk page to discuss them.Content must be written from aneutral point of view. Includecitations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

This page isnot a forum for general discussion aboutKim Dotcom. Any such commentsmay be removed orrefactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions aboutKim Dotcom at theReference desk.

This article is ratedC-class on Wikipedia'scontent assessment scale. It is of interest to the followingWikiProjects:

Biography:Politics and Government /Science and Academia This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited tojoin the project andcontribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to thedocumentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography This article is supported bythe politics and government work group (assessed asLow-importance). This article is supported bythe science and academia work group (assessed asLow-importance). GermanyHigh‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofGermany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany High This article has been rated asHigh-importance on theproject's importance scale. New Zealand:PoliticsHigh‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofNew Zealand andNew Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand High This article has been rated asHigh-importance on theproject's importance scale. This article is supported bythe New Zealand politics task force (assessed asMid-importance). Computing This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofcomputers,computing, andinformation technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing ??? This article has not yet received a rating on theproject's importance scale. This article has beenautomatically rated by abot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the|auto= parameter. FinlandLow‑importance This article is within the scope ofWikiProject Finland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofFinland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.FinlandWikipedia:WikiProject FinlandTemplate:WikiProject FinlandFinland Low This article has been rated asLow-importance on theproject's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than60 days may be auto-archived byLowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

How is what this person says about cryptocurrency encyclopedia worthy?--84.118.56.83 (talk)21:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

same for lighting a cristmas tree, or "On 10 September 2013, Dotcom announced that he would play 100 people in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 at New Zealand's first Digital Entertainment Expo.". Several of the "Other Activities" sounds like random crap that ~nobody would care about.H0536330126 (talk)11:40, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, none of this seems like relevant or necessary information.— Precedingunsigned comment added by66.248.244.13 (talk)05:14, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since when has venturebeat.com been a trusted source?

Also online multiplayer games have numerous gaming servers, different servers for different parts of the world such as one for Europe, and one for North America, so if a person becomes number one, it would normally just mean they’re number one for that server/that part of the world.

Also the ‘in game’ number one rank changes regularly many times throughout the year, can even change daily so that rank isn’t the ‘official number one’.To achieve being the official number one you have to win at a special event/competition which are normally held at Las Vegas.

HardeeHar (talk)17:46, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These claims are widespread online, but I think they probably should be attributed that he claims to have this rank. I too have seen it in his interviews, it not only venturebeat. But we might not want to say it in wikivoice.Jtbobwaysf (talk)18:32, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You’re only officially ranked number one if you won the competition so he isn’t and was never officially ranked number one, he just made number one online on that server on that day and it possibly only lasted a few hours or even few minutes before his rank had dropped to a lower number and someone else was listed as number one.So I don’t see why it’s mentioned in this wikipage.

Every time somebody becomes number one online in COD is it going to be mentioned on the COD wikipage, no cuz that would be stupid and also because reaching number one online doesn’t make you the official world number one, so I don’t see why there’s an exception made for kim.

You mention the claims are widespread online, but the source of the info came from kim whom isn’t a wiki trusted source, and as ive mentioned he isn’t and wasn’t the official number one, he is mistaken.

The reason gaming company's have an official competition to determine the world number one, rather than going off the in game ranking system is because if you went off the in game ranking system there would thousands of people all over the world all claiming they were the worlds number one (just as kim is doing).

It’s also important to know that whilst kim, Wikipedia and numerous sources online claim kim was the world number one that year, officially somebody else was officially rank number in the world that year, a person who attended and won the COD competition.

HardeeHar (talk)07:45, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As a few housekeeping notes for new editors. Please use the colons prior to your response to indent your comments so it is clear this is a thread. I added three colons to my response here, as generally speaking you should have added two colons to your prior response to me (since I added one colon above to my initial response to you). This threading will assist other editors in understanding this discussion. Also please dont add blank space (as an apparently intended indent) to your signature, as then you are activating a quotation format. We dont use quotation format for a signature. Next regarding the content of your response, while your view of how a #1 rank is defined might in fact be true, it is not how we work at wikipedia. We useWP:RS to determine these things. And given that Kim is often referred to as this #1 rank (whether true or not), whether it is actually true or not is not of high importance to us editors. We useWP:DUE to make this determination.Jtbobwaysf (talk)08:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it’s a shame that somebody attended and won the COD competition and officially achieved the rank of world number one that year, and that persons achievement is essentially being taken away from them by Wikipedia and other online sources because they’re all citing kim whom wrongly claimed he was the worlds number one because he didn’t know and understand how game ranking system really works.

If every time a celebrity makes claim and magazines and websites print it, and Wikipedia then cites it, Wikipedia will become a completely untrustworthy source of info, this is why Wikipedia insists on using a trusted sources.HardeeHar (talk)08:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

VentureBeat is considered to be "generally reliable for articles relating to businesses, technology and video games":https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources For better or worse.Cortador (talk)15:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've always thought that this looks like a clearWP:AUTO claim coming from Kim Dotcom in interviews, but since it appears in "reliable" sources it is hard to challenge.--♦IanMacM♦^{(talk to me)}16:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added a clarification to the claim. He was #1 in a specific category of gameplay that relied on total number of kills, and as such as long as you play enough eventually you can become #1. It doesn't even require much skill, just time. Considering the various accusations that he made his employees play for him, that would line up with how much time he would have had to sink into the game despite at the time being married with several children, multiple businesses, etc.

CountGrey (talk)15:31, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"As he was a minor, he was given a two-year suspended sentence;[47] the judge of the case described Schmitz's actions as "youthful foolishness".[49]" - Reference 47 no longer exits, and the statement made here is wrong. Kim was not a minor in 1998, given that he was born in 1974.Angeloh (talk)10:49, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Can we just note that the subject claims he had this rank? Just his claim is certainlyWP:DUE even if it is only self promotion.Jtbobwaysf (talk)03:07, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although Dotcom appears to have saidthis on his X/Twitter account, the problem is that tweets on their own are not very noteworthy. This needs some secondary news coverage to establish notability, and there doesn't seem to be much from reliable mainstream sources (not blogs etc).♦IanMacM♦^{(talk to me)}12:38, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @PaulRevered:, I have twice reverted your addition andre-addition of this content to theWP:LEAD, which is first undue as the LEAD summarizes. Second, you twice added a source that doesnt appear to be anWP:RS on a BLP. You added a second source stating that the subject had "praised" but I didnt see that in the source. Do not add re-add again without consensus here and be aware ofWP:BLPRESTORE (second time I have advised you of this, first time was in previous edit summary). Thanks!Jtbobwaysf (talk)10:12, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Understood, my apologies. I attempted to comply by adding the NZ Herald, which is a credible source; would it be acceptable to only reference information from that source, or should I hold off on mentioning this entirely until we have more of a consensus here?PaulRevered (talk)14:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You should hold off entirely for now until you discuss here and find consensus to add. Maybe this could be added to the body (if it was properly worded, I dont think the subject praised as you stated). But certainly this isWP:UNDUE in the lead. This promotion of what is essentially trivia to the lead is grossly undue.Jtbobwaysf (talk)23:15, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say it's a step above trivia; if you check his trivia, this is basically all he talks about now. I'll wait for more mainstream coverage, but this is his primary output as of 2024, he just isn't as notable anymore.PaulRevered (talk)17:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Check his twitter, sorry for typo.PaulRevered (talk)17:00, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It remains undue in the lead, the lead summarizes. We dontWP:RGW and particularly not in the lead.Jtbobwaysf (talk)22:24, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would be interesting to see any sources demonstrating that he ever hacked anything (i.e. demonstrated any level of technical computer skill), rather than just trading pirated software and stolen bank details etc., which requires no skill.2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:BDA5:68B2:EEE:ABAE (talk)09:29, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia controversial topics
• Biography articles of living people
• C-Class biography articles
• C-Class biography (politics and government) articles
• Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
• Politics and government work group articles
• C-Class biography (science and academia) articles
• Low-importance biography (science and academia) articles
• Science and academia work group articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• C-Class Germany articles
• High-importance Germany articles
• WikiProject Germany articles
• C-Class New Zealand articles
• High-importance New Zealand articles
• C-Class New Zealand politics articles
• Mid-importance New Zealand politics articles
• WikiProject New Zealand articles
• C-Class Computing articles
• Unknown-importance Computing articles
• Automatically assessed Computing articles
• All Computing articles
• C-Class Finland articles
• Low-importance Finland articles
• All WikiProject Finland pages

• Noindexed pages