[0] https://tor.stackexchange.com/questions/876/does-tor-work-wi...
Maybe it's safer to use a clear description rather than "anonymous". The "no user account is required" is a good statement which can be hardly misunderstood.
There are many people out there (including me) which think anonymous means nobody can trace or identify me. Anonymity even with Tor is very hard to achieve on the Internet, I would even say it's impossible.
On my software I'm using the word "private" instead of anonymous to describe such communication; which was inspired by Tor tech talks. I've written about it here https://cryonet.io/technology.html
Regardless, it's Wikipedia, that definition ought to be fixed to say "identity" rather than "name".
> Anonymous User is any user who accesses network resources without providing a username or password.
Se anonymous is correct in this context
A more descriptive term would be "account-free".
Since in WebRTC peers connect directly to each other they'll see the IP of the other peer and can determine their locations.
Further there is the signalling server which may also see these connection details if it isn't end to end encrypted (I haven't checked the code).
IMHO private might be a better word than anonymous here.