Jump to content

Talk:Murder of Seth Rich: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Reverted 1 edit by 71.31.255.53 (talk): It's about the murder, not the person, and this isn't a forum
m top: blpo=yes + blp=no/null → blp=other; cleanup
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Skip to talk}}
{{Talk header|search=yes|archive_age=60|archive_units=days|archive_bot=lowercase sigmabot III}}
{{Talk header|search=yes}}
{{Not a forum}}
{{Not a forum}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
{{FAQ|collapsed=no}}
Line 43: Line 43:
| topic = socsci
| topic = socsci
}}
}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|blpo=yes|class=C|living=no|listas=Rich, Seth|1=
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=C|blp=other|listas=Rich, Seth|1=
{{WikiProject Biography}}
{{WikiProject Biography}}
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Death|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Death|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=yes|American-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Politics|importance=low|American=yes|American-importance=low}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|DC=Yes|DC-importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject United States|importance=low|DC=yes|DC-importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Journalism|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Alternative views|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=low}}
}}
}}
Line 67: Line 67:


== poor quality ==
== poor quality ==
{{hat|Not a forum for gripes about media coverage that you don't like}}

The amount of conjecture in this article is astounding. "3 websites say something is true, so that means something is true." [[User:Jawz101|Jawz101]] ([[User talk:Jawz101|talk]]) 16:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
The amount of conjecture in this article is astounding. "3 websites say something is true, so that means something is true." [[User:Jawz101|Jawz101]] ([[User talk:Jawz101|talk]]) 16:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)


:{{u|Jawz101}}, what are you referring to? Because if it's {{tq|The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post wrote that the promotion of these conspiracy theories was an example of fake news}}, those "3 websites" are [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], which means it is [[WP:V|verified content]]. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 17:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
:{{u|Jawz101}}, what are you referring to? Because if it's {{tq|The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post wrote that the promotion of these conspiracy theories was an example of fake news}}, those "3 websites" are [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], which means it is [[WP:V|verified content]]. – [[User:Muboshgu|Muboshgu]] ([[User talk:Muboshgu#top|talk]]) 17:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
::"If enough for-profit rags repeat the same trash, it's indisputably true." What a fucking nightmare. [[Special:Contributions/73.193.109.117|73.193.109.117]] ([[User talk:73.193.109.117|talk]]) 22:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
:::If you don't like the way mainstream media report news, then you need to get policy changed. [[User:The Four Deuces|TFD]] ([[User talk:The Four Deuces|talk]]) 16:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
{{hab}}

Latest revision as of 14:09, 12 November 2024

Article milestones
DateProcessResult
August 19, 2016Articles for deletionNo consensus
September 15, 2016WikiProject approved revisionDiff to current version
October 4, 2016Articles for deletionNo consensus
January 21, 2017Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
February 26, 2017WikiProject approved revisionDiff to current version
May 30, 2017WikiProject approved revisionDiff to current version

poor quality

[edit]
Not a forum for gripes about media coverage that you don't like
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

The amount of conjecture in this article is astounding. "3 websites say something is true, so that means something is true." Jawz101 (talk) 16:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jawz101, what are you referring to? Because if it's The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times and The Washington Post wrote that the promotion of these conspiracy theories was an example of fake news, those "3 websites" are reliable sources, which means it is verified content. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"If enough for-profit rags repeat the same trash, it's indisputably true." What a fucking nightmare. 73.193.109.117 (talk) 22:56, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't like the way mainstream media report news, then you need to get policy changed. TFD (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]