03:2603:26, 4 April 2024diffhist−96
Jackson Hinkle
Undid revision 1217149421 by Zenomonoz (talk) I was not referring specifically to the 'contentious labels' policy on Wikipedia, although I see why you would assume that and revert. The issue is that "and conspiracy theories, according to Bellingcat" is not really lead material. The lead should be written based on the weight of sources, not based on claims "according to" any one outlet.Tags: UndoReverted
03:1403:14, 4 April 2024diffhist−96
Jackson Hinkle
The fact that a single source, Bellingcat, said a thing, is not sufficient to add another contentious label to the lede. "A history of spreading misinformation and disinformation" is more than enough to explain to the reader how they're supposed to feel about Hinkle. anyway.Tag: Reverted
20:5420:54, 1 April 2024diffhist+24
Larry C. Johnson
he is much more known for his political commentary than for his blogging, and he's called a "political commentator" elsewhere on Wikipedia
03:1303:13, 28 March 2024diffhist−65
Jimmy Chérizier
Wikipedia should not be a host for unsourced speculation about a political figure's "motives" - I have no idea what his true intentions are in his heart, and neither does anyone else on Wikipedia.
16:1716:17, 11 March 2024diffhist0
The Grayzone
Critical is a more neutral, less emotional description than "negative". This article should read like an encyclopedia article, not a "dunk" on the Grayzone. The article is already heavily skewed in the "dunk" direction, no need to lean further into that.