Talk:Timeline of Gamergate

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon internet.svg

This Internet related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>

Minor correction[edit]

Weev is a former GNAA president (circa 2010), not a co-founder. Sam Hocevar (talk) 08:25, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Are the founders known? - David Gerard (talk) 22:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Ablegamers link[edit]

On December 7 you have a dead link to ablegamers site:

I didn't remove it just in case anyone knew what it was about and might be able to find a new link to the article.

New entries[edit]

I can't edit this due to protection levels. There have been some recent events that could be added, although I'm not sure if the Milo things are directly connected to GamerGate and need to be here.

Lightning Dust (talk) 22:57, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Also maybe include some info from this:, sorry about crap website/source. But info is still good...

Seems no one is really keeping an eye on this page anymore, but I would point out the FBI stuff popped up first back in December due to a freedom of information request by a GG supporter. I do not believe any of the press coverage noted this fact, nor did they seem to cite some of the details (such as the school shooting threat Sarkeesian said cited GamerGate being an obvious troll falsely claiming to be a noted critic of hers). The Milo stuff would be relevant as his book has a section about GamerGate, though it should be noted that he has since self-published his book and it is reportedly selling extremely well. The recent Vidcon incident should also be included here, as well as the Tim Soret incident. As far as the IP's suggestion, the only two there worth mentioning are both from 2016, but should be mentioned. Faraci's situation was noteworthy enough to pop up in news articles and he was very active in opposition to GamerGate. The other incident involves the guy from Crash Override, which is noteworthy for the broader dust-up it involved. Specifically, the leaking of Crash Override chats and a failed attempt at doxing the GamerGate supporter who first put out the leaks. Neither incident got added here despite them happening last year.--The Devil's Advocate (talk) 03:59, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Can't edit[edit]

I can't edit this due to protection levels.

July 2017 - seattle4truth, an integral gamergate "digger," who allegedly uncovered nefarious connections between the gaming press and DARPA, is accused of murdering his father, with court documents saying he said the victim was a "leftist pedophile." (source: , theralphretort /ralph-retort-statement-lane-davis/ ) CR (talk) 16:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Done.Kazitor, pending 04:57, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

November 4, 2017 - Techraptor announce a change in focus and mark many of their old stories as “Not up to current editorial standards”and remove four stories due to them being unsupported attack pieces. State that they where always neutral on gamergate but now are even more apolitical. — Unsigned, by: / talk

Done. —Kazitor, pending 09:27, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

The Shufflegate thing[edit]

I think this part needs a rewrite. I don't think Quinn's accusation to Nintendo is substantial. In the grand scheme of things, Watergate is a much bigger event and came first and also involved five guys. I think she has less standing here. If the GamerGate guys were using this as a means of siding with Nintendo and saying that Nintendo endorses GamerGate, well, screw them. But I don't think this is Nintendo's fault and we'll have to say, "they didn't know better" this time. The language in the quoted passage is too derisive here, though. I feel the article's defense of her isn't really convincing, and this is the one time I disagree with her, strongly. I think she has the right to express herself and react a certain way given all that terrible stuff she has to endure, but I keep feeling it's a knee-jerk reaction just this time. If I missed something or disagree, feel free to respond. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Great article for sure, but -[edit]

Maybe I just don’t get how the timeline style articles work on here, but I personally find the current layout kinda confusing? I only know the very basics of gamergate, and while a proper timeline (especially with this much info) is incredibly useful for covering stuff that can’t be in full paragraphs or the main page etc, I just feel like the way that it’s basically a series of shit that happened on various dates, with very minimal explanation of their effect or relevance on the whole GG bullshit, or how the events linked and stuff? Maybe I’m just a dumbass who need to “Read Between The Lines” but this timeline makes it very difficult for me, personally, to actually follow the details instead of being inundated w. them. My suggestion would be that many/most/all of the bullet points should maybe have a bit more analysis and description etc, especially IRT to the significance of each individual event maybe? I don’t know, I’m not the expert here obviously. I just feel like this long ass timeline, while an amazing resource for documenting the basics of what happened when, doesn’t really give me a feel for how the movement actually developed? But that’s just my dumb opinion tbh, overall an excellent article and probably easier to understand who aren’t Dumb Asses like me lmoa — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

The Gamergate shit storm evolved very rapidly and was covered here in close to real time. There was one editor in particular that contributed much to the original article, and the timeline evolved out of the enormous amount of material taken from the original article. It stands now mostly as an artifact of that time. The main article is where to find the analysis; the timeline is more of a backup and reference for the main article. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 01:14, 24 June 2020 (UTC)