Talk:Pizzagate/Archive2

Cover story

Yay

1. Reason: It's fucking pizzagate. And it's a silver article, unless it doesn't deserve silver.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 03:39, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
2. I second the motion. —вιgℓʝвιgℓ (ᴛᴀʟᴋ/sᴛᴀʟᴋ) 23:44, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
3. Conditional yay: if the graphical section is cleaned up (each graphic should get its own section with the graphic either [1] centered above/below the debunk text or [2] side-by-side template'd). FᴜᴢᴢʏCᴀᴛPᴏᴛᴀᴛᴏ, Esϙᴜɪʀᴇ (talk/stalk) 01:04, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

   Like what you see so far, Mr. Cat?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 08:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

4. I agree with Fuzzy Cat Potato Vorarchivist (talk) 04:35, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

   Is it to your liking now?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 02:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

5. Clean up the sections and my vote will count.-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 05:15, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

   Is it to your liking now?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 02:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

6. I will agree after clean up, as per FuzzyCatPotato. Bongolian (talk) 05:37, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

   Is it to your liking now?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 02:53, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

   I'm satisfied. Give everyone else concerned a day or so to review. Bongolian (talk) 00:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

7. It seems a bit better now. I'm with the yays. RoninMacbeth (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
8. —ClickerClock (talk) 11:49, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Goat

1. The article feels very list-formatted right now: Single sentence, citation, newline. Repeat. Not sure that's reason enough to vote against, but... Herr FuzzyKatzenPotato (talk/stalk) 01:15, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

   What do you say, @FuzzyCatPotato, have your issues been addressed? Bongolian (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

2. Also, we need to clean up the references so that they are clearer (no http showing). They look awful, especially for a cover story. Bongolian (talk) 04:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

   Just tried to quickly clean up bare refs 33 to 42 but whoever added them used an unfamiliar ref format, and it didn't take. Leuders (talk) 16:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

   Ah. FCP. Clean up your room. Leuders (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

   The references are now reasonably formatted enough, though could still use some work. Someone still needs to write the front-page abstract and endnotice. Bongolian (talk) 21:24, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

3. It debunks the story, but it's messy as hell (hey, I'm not saying I'm the best formatter). I just don't know. RoninMacbeth (talk) 18:21, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

   You'll have to be more specific. What needs to be changed to sway your vote to "Yay"?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 19:14, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

   I really don't know. I can't put my finger on it, but something just doesn't feel right. Consider mine a non-vote. I don't care enough one way or another. RoninMacbeth (talk) 21:38, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

   Maybe move the reputable sources section as a subsection under "origin and spread"? Not sure if the Fry meme is necessary for this article, I think we can do without it. At the resolution I'm using, the code words table look sloppy and overlaps on the quotebox, positioned to the left of the image and squeezing the text. I also don't think the list format under "Pizzagate: Just The Facts" does its job at organizing information well. And there is no examples provided for some, such a "though it can still be made to fit" when referring to the grammatical wrongness of the French "code" or it can also go into more explanation for its apparent ties to Satanism. Maybe the section on the infographic can be expanded for more debunking? Like, it screams of green ink, pasting an incoherent jumble or images and words that have barely any relationship with each other. The article can do its job analyzing the infographic provided and explain why it's representative of other infographics. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

"You'll see the Podesta's Comet Pizza is the weirdest establishment on Earth." is a bold claim not supported by examples. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:29, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

That was me talking out of my arse. Nevertheless, Comet Ping Pong is a weird establishment with weird art. It has a weird hipster and edgy vibe to it.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 21:48, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Can you explain how, though? The weird art is an example, but any other specific trait can you show to support that Comet Ping Pong is weird? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 04:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

If you look at Comet's instagram from the infographics, the owner posted a screenshot of gay men licking a dick; with the text "I love penis", however, the image was obviously photoshopped where the dick was covered by pizza and the word "penis" was replaced with "pizza". There's also a Facebook photo of a guy jerking off and ejaculating pizza.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 05:25, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

well, doctoring of images should be discussed.

one more thing, this article should definitely take a shot a WikiLeaks, the twats who don't curate the shite they gleefully release because it makes Hillary look very bad. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 09:20, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

See this section—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 18:35, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I believe so but it mentions only how Clinton is screwed over. WikiLeaks, on the other hand, has that nerve to want to screw over other lives of private people (such as James Alefantis) rather than rich politicians and teh elite, which is pretty ironic given the "anti-elite" tone. After all, a gunman walked into there and I'm not sure what other consequences it had on people aside from Podesta and other Clinton-related targets. The article can indeed talk more about the consequences and then use it as a case in point why WikiLeaks is so dangerous if sensitive information is allowed to reign free and let cranks interpret them. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Whoever leaked these files probably had an ax to grind for Clinton. What worries me more is that we have to trust that WikiLeaks hasn't altered the data. Electronic evidence is incredibly easy to manipulate, especially when you're only providing files.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 20:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Even if the information is unaltered, what business does WikiLeaks have with the business at Comet Pizza? I find the motives of why WikiLeaks would release emails concerning mundane information along with more actual damning evidence like Clinton being paid by Wall Street to talk. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:42, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

@FuzzyCatPotato @Vorarchivist @DiamondDisc1 @Bongolian@RoninMacbeth @Bigs @LeftyGreenMario: Before I feel comfortable having this article as a cover story, I request you all to comb over the article one last time.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 20:11, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm just thinking how we can reduce all that white space without padding the text. Any ideas? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:42, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Also, it would be good for people to review the Template:Cover abstract/Pizzagate.Bongolian (talk) 00:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@FuzzyCatPotato @Vorarchivist @DiamondDisc1 @Bongolian@RoninMacbeth @Bigs @LeftyGreenMario: Shall we go along with putting this as a cover article?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 06:23, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

👍-(Ir)RationalWikian (talk) 03:46, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Info-graphics

I think we should use these info-graphics from Imgur. The current crazy-wall info-graphic is too tiny to be usable.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 05:05, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Table inside sbs

How much longer will society ignore these inconvenient truths? When a pattern emerges, will you ignore it? Real children get abused every day, is your fear of being labeled a conspiracy theorist going to spot you from achieving justice? #PedoFiles #SprititCooking #Anonymous

If anyone know hows to put the above code into this subsection, that would be nice. And no, the {{!}} doesn't work.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 06:44, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

"The Storm"

The Southern Poverty Law Center has a good write up about the continued evolution of Pizzagate into being about a counter-coup by Trump, who's been using the pseudonym "QAnon", to turn the Mueller investigation into mass arrests of "globalists" and their evil cabal (Clinton, Obama, other high-ranking Democrats) that's been stealing, raping, and eating babies to... somehow take over the world? You know how these things go. Would this need to be its own, new article or would it be added to this one? CalmlyBallistic (talk)

This looks like a candidate for a new article. Feel free to add it to RW's to do list. Regards, Cosmikdebris (talk) 17:23, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

As the "new" Pizzagate, it's definitely a standalone article with a link to this one. Leuders (talk) 17:28, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

linked to from Cracked.com

Idk how much traffic that'll bring but it's worth noting--"Shut up, Brx." 07:29, 1 May 2019 (UTC)

Epstein photo caption

How is it antisemitic to claim that Epstein did not act alone? Are you guys serious with that photo caption? ^{— Unsigned, by: 2605:6000:1018:c7c6:55c0:5524:51c7:810c / talk}

We are serious about that. The reason that the pictured protester is antisemitic is because the sign that he is holding says, "(((Epstein))) did not act alone!…" The triple parentheses is an antisemitic dogwhistle that the alt-right uses to target Jews. It is only ever not antisemitic when a Jewish person uses it on their own name to stick to the Nazis. Bongolian (talk) 03:59, 22 February 2020 (UTC)