Talk:Gonzalo Lira

Unreliable sources?

Some sources cited in the article seem questionable:

• This source is used as a reference for his degree, book and claim to be a developer on Soldier of Fortune. It seems to be for a blog and podcast - these are not generally accepted as they fall under WP:SPS.
• His entry on IMdb - fails WP:IMDB
• IMdb entry for film Secuestro - again fails WP:IMDB
• a blog - fails WP:SPS. Also mentions "HE WALL STREET JOURNAL, which is a link to the home page of the site and does not link to the Wall Street Journal, which makes the reliability look questionable too
• The Rio Times - not clear at all that this is a WP:RS - in fact it embeds one of his videos and the text seems to be based on that, so more WP:SPS, probably not reliable.
• Ridus.ru is described on Ridus as containing both editorial and user submitted content - thus failing WP:SPS and also its writing quickly drifted closer to government opinion; the publication is now largely seen as a propaganda outlet of the Russian state - which suggests that it should be regarded as unreliable and also discussed on WP:RSN.
• This article lists the byline as Gonzalo Lira, Rusia, Ucrania , so fails WP:RS as it is quoting Lira himself.
• This Telegram posting from Scott Ritter fails points 2(claims about third parties) and 3(involves claims about events not directly related to the source) of WP:SOCIALMEDIA.

Autarch (talk) 22:44, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

The Business Insider is also a WP:CIRCULAR as it refers back to the Wikipedia page. BeŻet (talk) 16:33, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I'd missed that.Autarch (talk) 20:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I think some of the usages of these sources have been cleaned up.

As a youtuber, most of the best information about this guy seems to be from youtube itself.

e.g, here is a

2 part documentary about him for those wondering about his background:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kurfNa0z4Ic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoNDwOHwtxc

There have been some reliable sources who have written about his detainment, but I think he may potentially end up in danger of Wikipedia:1EVENT. Cononsense (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Article should not be in past tense

Why is this article written in the past tense? We don't even know if he was kidnapped, let alone if he's dead. The man should be presumed to be alive until we know otherwise. "Gonzalo Ángel Quintilio Lira López (born 29 February 1968), also known by the pseudonym Coach Red Pill, was a Chilean-American novelist,..." 76.202.192.102 (talk) 22:51, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

“Was”

“Coach RedPill was…..”

Seeing as it hasn’t been confirmed he’s dead shouldn’t it say ‘is’ - Coach RedPill is…

HardeeHar (talk) 06:13, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I would tend to agree, although I am not sure about the technicalities involved in how to go about this. We have a highly competent source who is citing reports that Lira was killed by the Kraken Unit of the Azov Battalion. While this is not a confirmation, it is also not leaving much room for doubt. Havradim leaf a message 06:37, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't think what you're citing is of any use here. Scott Ritter has clarified that he has no direct evidence, so I'm not sure that anything he said makes those reports more plausible. A person may be extremely competent, but they cannot turn rumor into fact through mere repetition. Jml7c5 (talk) 09:17, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

In my opinion it is better to wait for reliable info. Mhorg (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Scott Ritter is not a competent source, he was denying the Bucha Massacre - it's a fringe source. BeŻet (talk) 16:20, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

No, he didn't deny Bucha Massacre. He said that he thinks that Ukrainians did it. Maybe next time listen to him more carefully. 2A01:114F:72A:100:ECF8:C625:6C3F:D365 (talk) 23:53, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Suggest deletion of unsourced material

The entire last paragraph of the Biography section (starting "In 2017, Lira was active on social networks") is completely unsourced, except for one reference at the end to an opinion article on The Daily Beast, which does not come close to meeting normal Wikipedia reliable-source criteria. Unless adequate reliable sources can be cited for this material, I suggest it should be removed completely. Longitude2 (talk) 09:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

I added a second source, which despite ref'ing the dailybeast, seemed to have done their own investigation of the content of lira's videos, because they reported things the db article did not. The article also mentioned they looked at Lira's telegram account, where he had been posting covid related info. Cononsense (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

He isn't missing

https://youtube.com/watch?v=R2yeSOcNlgE — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:444:FEEB:B4F5:7B8C:FC90:CC9C (talk) 10:14, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks anon user. Summary: he was taken from the SBU (Ukrainian secret service) and his cell phone and computer were taken away. Furthermore, he cannot leave Kharkiv for now. Mhorg (talk) 10:27, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

There is zero proof, zero proof that Lira was "taken by the SBU" other than Lira's own words (which is not a reliable source as per Wiki reliable-source criteria). I am deleting that part for several reasons: 1) No proof to support the claims, 2) He is alive and thus making that part of the page completely irrelevant. For all we know, Lira was hiding from Russia's bombing. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:27, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison we say what RS are saying and they say --> Cyprus Mail - The citizen-journalist said he was picked up by the SBU (Ukraine’s Security Service) on April 15 – the day all contact was lost with him, with many of his followers fearing the worst. - you can’t do your WP:OR demanding a prove. We follow RS's GizzyCatBella🍁 13:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

"Journalist"

There's not enough sources describing him as a "journalist", therefore we shouldn't describe him as such. He's primarily a YouTuber who happened to be in Ukraine during the conflict and posted some videos about it. BeŻet (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

We go what RS say. Do not remove sourced information - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:12, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop bolding text unnecessarily. Please show me several good quality sources referring to him as a journalist. BeŻet (talk) 12:16, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop removing sources as you did here. --> [1] - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I told you already, stop bolding text like that, it's rude. BeŻet (talk) 12:19, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I didn’t mean to be rude. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:21, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I forgive you. Could we please identify which sources describe him as a journalist as I'm not convinced this is backed up by a lot of good quality sources? BeŻet (talk) 12:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

There is a RS describing him as a journalist. You clam he is not. So find a source that specifically says "Lira is not a journalist" - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I'm saying that there aren't many high quality sources describing him as such. It's silly to expect a source that says "Lira is not a journalist". You say that he's described as a "citizen-journalist" which further implies he's not a real journalist. I personally think this label should not be applied so liberally. BeŻet (talk) 14:28, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I registered another source describing his as Journalist -->[2] - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:38, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Gizzy, I agree with @BeŻet: both your sources are the same source, "Mendovoz.com" which is not a reliable source. So far, you've given no reliable source to support the claim that he's a 'journalist.' I feel keeping that 'journalist' claim on the page misleading and should be removed. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

No, you are mistaken. The second source is Cyprus Mail from Nicosia that describe his as citizen-journalist -->[3] - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison GizzyCatBella🍁 13:03, 23 April 2022 (UTC) quote from Cyprus Mail - The citizen-journalist said he was picked up by the SBU (Ukraine’s Security Service) on April 15 – the day all contact was lost with him, with many of his followers fearing the worst.

Your source, Cyprus Mail, calls him a "vlogger" not a "journalist" which is your claim. A vlogger is someone who uploads videos of his or her own life rather than writing about it. A journalist writes, vloggers youtube. He's a youtuber. He's not a journalist. @BeŻet: is 100% correct. BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison Look at the quote above from Cyprus Mail and check the source. They call him citizen-journalist for Christ sake. Stop with that already please. GizzyCatBella🍁 13:30, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison I’ll quote it for you again in bold - The citizen-journalist said he was picked up by the SBU (Ukraine’s Security Service) on April 15 – the day all contact was lost with him, with many of his followers fearing the worst. - and here is the link for you to confirm that --->[4] - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:33, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

You use him as your "source" and there is no reliable source to support any of his allegations about SBU. The last 3 paragraphs should be are UNDUE and are not supported by reliable sources. Last 3 paragraphs should be removed because Wiki prohibits using wiki to peddle in conspiracy theories. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:02, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop bolding text unnecessarily it is rude. To re-ask: please show us several good quality sources referring to him as a journalist. A journalist writes, he vlogs. He uploads videos of himself, he does not write. @BeŻet: is correct, your 'journalist' claim is not backed up by good quality sources. "Staff writer" at "Cyprus Mail" is not a reliable source. BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

That’s not my claims. I follow RS's and you have plenty of them in the article were he is refereed to as Journalist. - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

It is your claim and your claim is not supported by any reliable source. Not only that, I feel you've started an "edit war" that's causing wiki to peddle unfounded conspiracy theories that you keep adding in. @BeŻet: has much more experience on here than I do, so I would like BeŻet to check out the article's "View History" and let me know if they think you're starting an edit war to promote unfounded conspiracy theories, because I think you are. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop personal attacks please, discuss content and do not remove sources - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:17, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

"Lira’s disappearance received scant Western media coverage and was mostly reported by Asian, African and South American news outlets."

It's not surprising that a little known YouTuber doesn't get much coverage. This is not notable or worth mentioning in the article. BeŻet (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

You already nominated this article for deletion so we don’t need to hear your repeated opinions that he is “little" known. Almost 50.000 view of this page in 48 hour proved you were mistaken. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

That's not a lot of views. Please address the comment directly - it's completely undue to mention "scant Western media coverage", and it's WP:NPOV. BeŻet (talk) 12:25, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

There is nothing undue about it. We report what RS are saying and Cyprus Mail is a reliable source. Your personal opinion has been heard already but it is inaccurate. - GizzyCatBella🍁 12:27, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Gizzy, @BeŻet: is correct, it is undue and therefore the last 3 paragraphs should be removed. Short list of why it's Undue 1) His 'self-published' comments he made on "the Duran" youtube is not a reliable source; 2) Even the Cyprus Mail article confirms millions of Ukrainians can't be located (missing) because they're hiding from Russian bombardment so him being one of millions does not confirm the "scant" coverage claim. 3) He is not missing. 4) Most importantly, there is no reliable source to confirm any of Lira's claims of where he was. Lira's 'self-published' claims is not a reliable source as per Wiki. BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:14, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I personally think his disappearance was staged but BetsyRMadison - we still need too follow what RS say, regardless of our personal opinion about the person. Remember how it all started. BeŻet claimed he is not notable at all and nominated the page for deletion, which is clear now to be a huge mistake. Please do not follow the same path with what might appear to some as an attempt of suppressing the information about the fellow.. - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

It's clear now to be a huge mistake - what? I still think the article should be deleted as he hasn't received enough widespread coverage. Nobody has proven me wrong. BeŻet (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

We know you think the article should be deleted, this was clear from the very beginning and has been noted. However numerous (almost all) editors do not agree with your evaluation --> [5] - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I agree with @BeŻet:. The article should be removed. As it right now, the article is riddled in peddling unfounded conspiracy theories. And if you're not going to delete the article, then at the very least, the unfounded conspiracy theories you're added, which are not supported by any RS, must be removed. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:33, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison Please voice your opinion at the deletion page. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

There is no RS to support your 'journalist' claim. The last 3 paragraphs are misleading, undue, peddle unfounded conspiracies, and should be removed. Example: you misleadingly wrote: "Chilean embassies and consulates worldwide acquired hundreds of thousands of calls with questions about Lira’s fate." When the truth is: Moscow native, Alex Christoforou, who runs the pro-Russian "The Duran" blog made the claim and there is no reliable source to supports his claim. If you insist on adding that unfounded claim, then you must include that it came from Alex Christoforou. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison you are welcome challenge the reliability of the given sources at the appropriate board but for now please do not remove them. They are reliable as of now. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:31, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

The problem, regarding "scant Western media coverage", is not around reliability of sources, but WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV. And I'm asking you one final time to not bold text. BeŻet (talk) 14:36, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

You've been told to stop bolding text unnecessarily because it is rude, yet you keep doing it. You have no RS. None. And, I feel you started an "edit war." I will remove and/or reword the conspiracy theories you keep adding. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:36, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Well, if you remove RS again you might be reported. Just to let you know. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Interesting... you, GizzyCat, started an "edit war" and now you threaten people who tell you they're going to clean up the unfounded conspiracy theories you keep adding. hmmm... BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:48, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I don’t appreciate your attitude towards me. Once again, please discuss content. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:51, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@ BetsyRMadison and BeŻet Can you two show me a policy that prohibits bolding of the text please? - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:45, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Gizzy, You threatened to report me because I told you "I will remove and/or reword the conspiracy theories you keep adding." Your threats violate wiki's talk page WP:TALKNO policy "Personal threats: For example, threatening people with "admins [you] know" or with having them banned for disagreeing with you." Also you keep WP:SHOUTING (via bold text) even after BeZet and told you that your bold text shouting at us is rude. In short, shouting and threating people goes against WP Talkpage guidelines. BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Please don't shout and WP:SHOUT. BeŻet (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Quote (WP:SHOUT) - Bolding may be used to highlight key words or phrases - Thank you and please stop this off topic exchange, I have no time nor desire to continue talking about text bolding with you two. GizzyCatBella🍁 13:12, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Stop talking like a colonialist, BeZet. Asian, African, and South American count. And Gonzalo Lira is an important Chilean-American YouTuber with a huge following.Myatrrcc (talk) 04:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Cyprus Mail at RSN

I've started a RSN discussion on the use of the Cyprus Mail here.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:29, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Source misrepresentation

BetsyRMadison - With this edit [6] it appears that you might have misrepresented the source.

You wrote, (in bold green is yours):

The Cyprus Mail quoted Moscow native, Alex Christoforou, who claimed that Chilean embassies and consulates worldwide acquired "hundreds of thousands of calls" with questions about Lira’s fate. However, when Cyprus Mail contacted the Consulate of Chile in Nicosia, the Honorary Consul George Zachariades did not substantiate Christoforou's claim and would only confirm that he had "no information on Lira’s whereabouts.

Full quote from the source:

Earlier on Friday, and while Lira was still missing, the Cyprus Mail had contacted the Consulate of Chile in Nicosia. At the time Honorary Consul George Zachariades said he had no information on Lira’s whereabouts.

He had tried to contact the Chilean consulate in Kiev, but to no avail.

Alex Christoforou, co-host of The Duran, told the Cyprus Mail that during the seven days of silence Chilean embassies and consulates around the world had received “hundreds of thousands of calls and messages” asking about Lira’s fate. --> [7]

You misrepresented:

• Source says nothing about quoted Moscow native
• Source says nothing about Honorary Consul George Zachariades did not substantiate Christoforou's claim about the phone calls.

I’m inviting you to correct that please. Thank you. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella: Everything I posted in my edit is 100% accurate. For example: 1) The Cyprus Mail did, in fact, quote Moscow native, Alex Christoforou, who did claim that Chilean embassies and consulates worldwide acquired "hundreds of thousands of calls" with questions about Lira’s fate. 2) And when Cyprus Mail contacted the Consulate of Chile in Nicosia, the Honorary Consul George Zachariades did not substantiate Christoforou's claim and would only confirm that he had "no information on Lira’s whereabouts. Unless you can show me any part of the article that you think says Christoforou's allegations were substantiated by the Consulate of Chile; then your accusations of me 'misrepresenting' the article is completely unfounded. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

That might be true or might be not. We don’t know. All we know that the information you added was not present in this particular source (see above). What you have done seems to be WP:OR = misrepresenting source. Pay attention to things like that. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella: my edits are not "original research" because all my edits are easily verifiable within the article. In the Cyprus Mail article I read, the Consulate of Chile did not substantiate Christoforou's allegations and only said, "he had no information on Lira’s whereabouts." BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

You wrote "the Consulate of Chile did not substantiate Christoforou's allegations". But he didn't deny them either, which is what you were implying by your edit.

And the fact that you're pointing out that I'm only editing this article is a way to disqualify the edits I've made. I've been editing off-and-on since 2007. I got interested in this guy, and decided to edit the incredibly lopsided entry. I got it into fairly decent shape. Please don't let your personal dislike for this person make this an unpleasant experience for people who are trying to help. Thank you. Dorfpert (talk) 16:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: According to Wiki, your first comment ever on wiki is today. And all your comments are only on this one person [8] and here [9]. BetsyRMadison (talk) 17:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Russian Foreign Ministry Mentions Lira

"MOSCOW (UrduPoint News / Sputnik - 21st April, 2022) The Russian Foreign Ministry's spokeswoman said on Thursday she hoped that Chilean journalist Gonzalo Lira Lopez, who disappeared in Kharkiv after criticizing Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, was alive and well.

Maria Zakharova said the journalist provided on-the-ground coverage of the Russian military operation in Ukraine, first from the capital of Kiev and then from the eastern city of Kharkiv, drawing the attention of the Ukrainian security service and the notorious Azov battalion.

"We sincerely hope that... Gonzalo and his family are doing well," Zakharova wrote on Telegram.

The Chilean Foreign Ministry told Sputnik on Thursday that it was investigating the whereabouts of its national. The 54-year-old has not been heard from since last Friday when he posted about "Zelensky regime" on social media."

From UrduPoint, https://www.urdupoint.com/en/world/russian-foreign-ministry-hopes-chilean-journa-1500509.html

If being singled out by the Russian Foreign Ministry does not make a person notable, what does? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.86.220.212 (talk) 23:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

"Sputnik" is not a reliable source and neither is "Telegram." As editors, we must be very cautious to avoid unrealiable sources and to avoid promoting unfounded conspiracy theories. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

She made a statement on her official, verified Telegram channel, and it was republished by several reputable news sources. A simple Google search shows that. This is a spurious objection. Dorfpert (talk) 15:31, 24 April 2022 (UTC) ----<--- — Dorfpert (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:49, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Zakharova made plenty misleading/biased/propaganda statements, and in the context of russia-ukraine war Russian officials are far from being reliable sources. Not to say taht Zakharova did not provide the source of her informatuon, so that it can be independently verified. Loew Galitz (talk) 21:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Categories

Lira was in all sorts of categories that diluted the categories. Expressing a view does not equate with being an activist. Also he is no longer missing, ergo he shouldn't be categorized as missing. --Dorfpert (talk) 15:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

"Daily Beast" article not reliable source

So the following has been inserted several times:

Lira posted videos with titles such as "Never Date a Woman in her Thirties" and argued that all women really only want money.

The Daily Beast is referenced as the source.

Problem is, Lira never posted a video with that name (I checked on YT, Rumble and BitChute). And the line "[He] argued that all women really only want money" is not a direct quote from him. In fact it's really just a smear.

That's why I've removed it consistently.--Dorfpert (talk) 19:21, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: What you have done seems to be WP:OR. The source says "“Never date a woman in her thirties,” Lira, who’s in his fifties, said in one video created in 2020." Wiki editors have to state what the source says. I realize that this is your 2nd day of editing and this is the only topic you've edited. But you really need to pay attention to adhere to wiki's rules [10] BetsyRMadison (talk) 20:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Should we post obvious lies? I don't think so.

You like it or not, The Daily Beast writer told an easily verifiable lie about Lira. He never posted any video with such a title.

And you're using Wikipedia's rules as a shield so as to post innuendo, insofar as the line "[He] argued that all women really only want money" is concerned. That's an opinion/smear, and not a direct quote from Lira.

I've said it before, your personal animus towards this subject is not allowing you to see the situation objectively.

Or perhaps you don't want to be objective? Perhaps you have a partisan agenda you are trying to push here? Honest question, please answer. Dorfpert (talk) 20:22, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

I checked on YT, Rumble and BitChute. Just because something is no longer there, does not mean that it never existed. Please read WP:BRD and WP:NOTTRUTH. "Daily Beast" article not reliable source. The problem with that is the DB is one of the pillars currently holding up this article in WP namespace, an article under threat of deletion. We cannot have it both ways. While I would discount any bias that they may have, such as repeating that others called Lira "sleazy" and a "shill", the excised sentence was a simple statement of fact, and should be reinstated. See WP:NOTCENSORED. Havradim leaf a message 20:27, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: You are absolutely correct. BetsyRMadison (talk) 20:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: from wiki, "Do not make personal attacks anywhere on Wikipedia. Comment on content, not on the contributor." [11]. Also, wiki prohibits original research, which is what you've done. I feel you would benefit if you read WP:PILLARS [12] BetsyRMadison (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: You've misread the source. The sources doesn't say it was the title of the video (so maybe that's why you couldn't find it in your original research). Re-read what the source says "Never date a woman in her thirties,” Lira, who’s in his fifties, said in one video created in 2020." BetsyRMadison (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

According to the article, In November 2021, Lira deleted most of his CRP content and began posting under his legal name. So, whether or not the video is currently publicly accessible is immaterial to this discussion. Havradim leaf a message 20:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Can only concur with what others have written. We can't claim that he's notable based on the Daily Beast then remove everything the article says about him.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: and @Ermenrich: you both make excellent points. BetsyRMadison (talk) 21:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

Personal Life: The genealogy claims are not supported by the questionable sourced used

I removed @Dorfpert: edit that claimed, "Lira is a direct descendant of José Miguel Carrera, the first president of Chile, and Ignacio de la Carrera, who signed the first declaration of independence of Chile." The questionable source that Dorfbert used does not say that. So Dorfpert's claim is not supported.
Yesterday is the first day Dorfpert edited on wikipedia, this topic is the only topic Dorfpert has edited, and Dorfpert has gone over the WP:3RR limit [13]. To avoid Dorfpert unwittingly starting an edit war, Dorfbert should stop reverting and explain on this page why he/she thinks his/her questionable source makes that claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BetsyRMadison (talk • contribs) 22:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert here -->[14] it seems that its WP:OR of yours - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:59, 25 April 2022 (UTC)

No it's not. I went by what appeared in his wiki in other languages, where the first gen. To find confirmation, I googled "descendientes de jose miguel carrera" (a google translation, since I figured there be more hits in Spanish than English), and the very first entry was of Chile's National Library with confirmation.

Again, I insist: There are personal reasons why people are so adamant about diminishing this guy. Looking on the previous version of this entry that was deleted in 2014, it's clear it was brigaded into being deleted by people who really hated his guts.

I personally think he's a lolcow, but I have to be objective. He's notable, he's done some notable stuff, whether people like it or not. Trying to weasel this away is just sad. Dorfpert (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Can you quote from the source Lira is a direct descendant of José Miguel Carrera, the first president of Chile and link it here please - GizzyCatBella🍁 06:32, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Sure:

https://www.businessinsider.com/author/gonzalo-lira Dorfpert (talk) 08:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: your businessinsider link uses you as their source. You added it to wiki and then someone there put your wiki entry into your buisnessinsider link, meaning, you are their source; thus not Reliable Source for wiki.

You used 3 sources: your first 2 sources don't say what you claim & don't support your claim. Your 3rd source is you. You, and your entry at wiki, is your 3rd source.

I am deleting your entry. Do not revert it. You've gone over the WP:3RR limit, you've started an edit war, and you're doing WP:OR. BetsyRMadison (talk) 11:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Honest question, are you mental?[15] I did not write the BI link! lol

You've lost the plot because of your hatred of this person. I suggest you step away from this entry and go do something useful. Dorfpert (talk) 11:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

A gentle reminder that civility is part of the Wikipedia code of conduct and not to make personal attacks. Autarch (talk) 16:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert What on earth are you doing? BI referenced that info to Wikipiedia. Which is you - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert (see above[16]) Honest question, are you mental? Okay, now this is a personal attack. You better strike that Pal. - GizzyCatBella🍁 11:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

clearly Wikipedia:CIRCULAR, which is why I removed the content that referenced wikipedia in the first place.

furthermore, we should be wary of using Wikipedia:Bi as a RS for such content (as a primary source anyways), as especially back in 2010 [17], the site was kind of was a "collection of blogs". Cononsense (talk) 12:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

The Hatred For This Person Is Off The Charts!

I've said I think Lira is a lolcow. However, he IS notable. But there are people in this community who hate him beyond reason. They are nitpicking every little thing to get him smeared and/or removed. It's very funny! But I find it confusing.

I reviewed his previous entry, which was deleted in 2014. The same thing occurred. People brigaded the entry. They slowly stripped it of everything this person has actually done (all of which is noteworthy). They removed the fact that he was a published author. There was even one version where the editor removed the indisputable fact that he was a film director, and wrote under his picture while filming, "Lira holding a camera for some reason"! Then when the entry was picked clean, it was deleted.

It is clear to me that some people really hate this guy.

I go on this platform every 2 or 3 years for a while. I do it for fun, then lose interest, then I pick it up again. But I think I'll stay this time and monitor this entry. Because I think he's ridiculous, but this is unfair. And it defeats the purpose of Wikipedia, which is to present information about the world and the people in it. Whether we like them or not.

--Dorfpert (talk) 11:40, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Dorfpert: Your wiki history shows that 2 days ago you started editing on wiki and this is the only topic you've ever edited. You've gone over the WP:3RR limit, you've started an edit war [18], you've added WP:OR [19], you've not adhered to wiki voice, WP:NPOV [20]. Welcome to wiki; to help you get started on here, you should review WP:Pillars [21]. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

At this point I’m suspicious that Dorfpert might have a WP:conflict of interest. He claims insider knowledge about Lira in making his pro-Lira edits…—Ermenrich (talk) 12:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

You are lying about me. I have never claimed insider knowledge of Lira. Show me where, or apologize. Dorfpert (talk) 12:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

When you correct what RS say on the basis of what you yourself say is correct, that looks like a claim of insider knowledge to me. Particularly as Lira deleted the stuff you are “correcting”. Do you have a COI you would like to disclose? I would at least suggest reading our policy before you continue editing this article.—Ermenrich (talk) 12:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

What I noticed was that Dorfpert had similar (including unsourced) edits to that of:

Special:Contributions/109.86.220.212

which happens to be geolocated to Kharkiv. Cononsense (talk) 15:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Cononsense: Does that mean Dorfpert is in Kharkiv? BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

I have no clue of that (and I have no way to tell). it would require an investigation of WP:SOCK.

What I noticed was that:

1. the contributions of Special:Contributions/109.86.220.212 seemed fairly "close to the subject" of this article.

2. that ip is clearly in Kharkiv. you can use the geolocate tool to verify

3. dorfpert and 109.86.220.212's edits are quite similar in nature in terms of content changed

So this is just my observation. Perhaps good for this person to view WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI Cononsense (talk) 15:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Dorfpert sure had this right "people in this community who hate him beyond reason" - the attempts to silence his voice are Orwellian. Humanity does not move forward with out dissenting voices. Keeping this as a draft, pretending that he is not notable - hurts the credibility of Wikipedia.

Importance of mentioning Lira's thoughts on arming civilians

The article currently contains the following text: During the Russian offensive toward Kyiv, Lira criticised the government of Volodymyr Zelenskyy for arming the local population with weapons when the Territorial Defense Forces was expanded, a move that Lira said caused a rise in crime. Lira did not provide any evidence to corroborate this allegation. Is this particular opinion about something that happened in the first weeks of the war WP:DUE on this page? I would suggest deleting it.--Ermenrich (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - It provides a clue as to

one reason why the subject has been receiving so much attention. Unabashedly criticising a government at war on a public platform while simultaneously being subject to its jurisdiction is unusual. Havradim leaf a message 16:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

The only thing that has received any real attention is his supposed detention. His opinions are only covered by small outlets or Russian propaganda.--Ermenrich (talk) 16:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: Everyone is always 'subject to the jurisdiction' of where they visit or live so it's not "unusual" for Lira to be 'subject to the jurisdiction' of Ukraine while he's living in Ukraine. BetsyRMadison (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Being subject to one's own jurisdiction: Not unusual. Criticising a government on a public platform during a time of war: Not unusual. Living in a war zone: Somewhat unusual. Criticising a government on a public platform during a time of war while being subject to said government's jurisdiction: Unusual. (There is no need to ping me as I am watching this page.) Havradim leaf a message 17:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Havradim, ahh... thank you clarifying what you were calling unusual. I agree with you, that is unusual. :) BetsyRMadison (talk) 17:54, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support. It should be deleted; especially since Lira "did not provide any evidence to corroborate his allegation." BetsyRMadison (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

  It was never about the evidence, but rather the subject's commentary itself, which was critical of Zelenskyy's government and the (ex-) criminals themselves, who presumably were now armed to the teeth and prowling around the subject's neighbourhood. Havradim leaf a message 17:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

  who presumably were now armed to the teeth and prowling around the subject's neighbourhood. I think you're making a lot of assumptions there. This isn't even what he's complaining about here: it's the arming of civilians as such - which was a frequently criticized talking point among Russian propagandists and not a particularly notable opinion.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

  Havradim, Even based on what you say, I feel it's WP:DUE, so it should be deleted. BetsyRMadison (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support. As an opinion unrelated to his biography or this year's incident, that further has not evidence to support it, it should be removed. --NoonIcarus (talk) 07:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

References

A trivial business deal is noteworthy—but international attention for his disappearance is not?

This Steve Keen business is trivial. There's no allegation of wrongdoing, no lawsuit, no criminal complaint. How can this possibly be noteworthy enough to be included.

But disappearing for a week in a war zone while being mentioned on a dozen international news sites is NOT noteworthy?

Priorities, people, priorities. And don't let your hatred for the subject bias you. --Dorfpert (talk) 18:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

The only "international news sites" that have commented on it are Russian propaganda outlets or else small, English-language sites located in countries where the main language is not English. And no one has removed his so-called "disappearance." It's still there (at least until this article is hopefully deleted). What's been removed is the melodramatic bloat around the alleged event.--Ermenrich (talk) 21:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Dorfpert raises a valid concern. The Keen bit does come off as a somewhat petty thing to include here. Content like this does get included all the time in articles, especially when there is not much else to go on. And it is also helpful when sourced content links to other articles. However, per WP:BLP: Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. All agree that The Daily Beast is a questionable source, so until better sourcing can be found, I am highly skeptical that it should stay. Havradim leaf a message 00:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

I tend to agree that the Keen bit doesn't seem worthy of inclusion. As far as I know, nobody has covered that besides dailybeast, in all the years since it has happened. Perhaps if Lira's career as a economics pundit had been more well known or sustained. as far as I know, the notability there was concentrated around writing a few articles in the 2010-2012 timeframe that were republished on some aggregation websites.

I think comments by Maria Zakharova are more noteworthy. The Bulwark (website) (a center-right political commentary site, however, known for their factual accuracy) released an article about Lira this morning that provides more context around her comments relative to earlier articles than what sputnik said: https://www.thebulwark.com/the-redpill-grifter-who-became-an-anti-ukraine-propagandist-gonzalo-lira/ Cononsense (talk) 16:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

If we're including that, we should include the bit from the bulwark that it's been speculated that Lira staged his own disappearance. And maybe about his various anti-Semitic, misogynist, and anti-vax statements as well.--Ermenrich (talk) 17:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Besides the fact that the argument is a false equivalence (and furthermore a wrong one, since there is information about the subject's dissapearance), the included content talks about a personal project started with a notable economist, which is also related to the paragraph it is placed in. --NoonIcarus (talk) 09:07, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Keen - a business deal where he was locked out of his own commercial website; Suspension for Sexual Assault at Dartmouth; Failed "Show-biz, "rock star," type career tries as a director and novelist (1/100,000,000 odds of Being John Malkovich), constant Reinvention of himself, and attention getting. <-- Its the sum of its parts, the whole story here, the Bio of this Living Person. --- I listened to his recent podcasts (in which he claims he "signed a document with the SBU not to broadcast, yet he is still doing so - incredulous attention getting); he was talking about NGO's being an intelligence tool in the Ukraine fomenting anti-Russian sentiment. Here is an NPOV visit to pre-invasion Mariupol which speaks about NGO's pouring money into public infrastructure to improve a city that was environmentally degraded by pollution from legacy Soviet industry; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phnpmotMusE So yeah; NGO's pouring money into a place with historic environmental suffering essentially would inform folks that that things could be better and therefore lead to dissatisfaction. Propaganda usually starts from an element of truth; or can be largely true. Wikipedia describes propaganda quite accurately and its worthy of a look. Does this entry need to acknowledge that the subject is a propagandist (at best)? 71.203.10.104 (talk) 13:22, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the article already does a good enough job of implying this without straying into WP:BLP violations. Havradim leaf a message 20:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 27 April 2022

He might be better known as Coach Red Pill at least I knew of him for years as that before knowing his actual name, but recent media attention may be primarily what he's known for and not earlier activities and that may have made him become better known as Gonzalo Lira --Immanuelle (talk) 21:02, 02 May 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose Now he is best known as Gonzalo Lira and he himself dropped the red pill moniker. Loew Galitz (talk) 21:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
• Support Thinking about it, BLOGGER is the most fitting description of his vocation. He blogged in alt-finance, he blogged in the Man-o-sphere, and now he blogs Russian propaganda; and has been elevated to esteemed journalist by Pravda and other Russian outlets. A very nefarious reputation follows him across his life-story. Does "Being a Blogger" meet the standard of being Encyclopedic? 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

  His notability (for the purposes of wikipedia) was debated here. Cononsense (talk) 02:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

  I am not speaking to him.. Just asking "if bloggers belong in an encyclopedia?" 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

  Category:Bloggers. Havradim leaf a message 03:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose - While there are a lot more search engine hits for Coach Red Pill (CRP), many of them are false positives, or link to unreliable sources. This article is about the entirety of the subject's life, during most of which he was not known by this moniker. Loew Galitz is correct that Lira seems to have shelved the usage of CRP when he started newer channels under his legal name. Since he has chosen to use both names for his channels, it seems that the legal name carries more weight. Havradim leaf a message 03:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

  I agree. Having read that he was notable for reasons other than the Coach Red Pill blog and has stopped using it I think his legal name takes precedence. Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 04:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

  Perhaps "is a Chilean-American novelist" can be put in the body of the article - or authored x number of books in the body - Either as Coach Red Pill, or Surname, or Financially he has blogged for many years71.203.10.104 (talk) 12:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Suggest the First Sentence Be Changed

From

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American novelist,[2] film director, financial blogger, YouTuber, and commentator in the manosphere formerly known as Coach Red Pill. Being a resident of Kharkiv, Ukraine, he was in Kyiv at the onset of the 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine and started vlogging on the invasion from what has been described by The Daily Beast as a pro-Putin perspective.[3] In April 2022, Lira alleged that he was detained by the Security Service of Ukraine.[4]

Perhaps To:

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American blogger and YouTuber who has produced video and written content on an evolving list of topics to include "Russia's Invasion of the Ukraine," "The Man-O-Sphere" under the moniker of Coach Red Pill, and "Contrarian Economics." Being a resident of Kharkiv, Ukraine, he was in Kyiv at the onset of the 2022 Russian Invasion of Ukraine and started vlogging on the invasion from what has been described by The Daily Beast as a pro-Putin perspective.[3] In April 2022, Lira alleged that he was detained by the Security Service of Ukraine.[4]71.203.10.104 (talk) 13:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

PS the word used was "How a Sleazy American Dating Coach Became a Pro-Putin Shill in Ukraine" .. so the Daily Beast describes him as a Pro-Putin Shill which is stronger than a pro-Putin perspective and consistent with a person that is notable for being nefarious. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 13:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

per MOS:ROLEBIO:

The noteworthy position(s) or role(s) the person held should usually be stated in the opening paragraph. However, avoid overloading the lead paragraph with various and sundry roles; instead, emphasize what made the person notable. Incidental and non-noteworthy roles (i.e. activities that are not integral to the person's notability) should usually not be mentioned in the lead paragraph

imo, the "financial blogger" part can be removed, because there doesn't seem to be much in the way of secondary sources talking about that aspect of his work. To me, blogger isn't necessary since it mentions Youtuber. perhaps YouTube vlogger with YouTube wikilinked? Cononsense (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

It is fine the way it is. And YouTuber is an article. Havradim leaf a message 22:20, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

What is his primary vocation? In writing it is the Topic sentence. The article reads that he is primarily an author and filmmaker; when in fact they are long-past activities, the main idea (why people might be interested in him) relates to him blogging. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 23:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

We should not be looking at why he is currently popular, but how he will be known in the future. If anything, his books and films are more of the stuff of dusty library shelves than YouTube. Havradim leaf a message 00:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

I would agree... Youtube his focus. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 00:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: Lira is not "currently popular." He's just one more pro-Putin propagandist who's propaganda is replayed on Russia-state-owned propaganda outlets. He made unsubstantiated allegations about himself to

gain "popularity" but even that failed. The guy's current "15 min of fame" flamed out in less than 5 min. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding the Notability tag

Instead of adding it straight away, I thought I'll ask here first: should the Template:Notability tag be added to the top of the page? The deletion discussion finished with no consensus regarding notability, therefore we perhaps should inform our readers that Lira's notability is still uncertain. BeŻet (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Maybe wait a little bit, eh? - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Wait for what? We are going to wait to return to the discussion as suggested by the closer, and this is what I'm suggesting to do >while we wait<. BeŻet (talk) 21:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Why don’t you just wait. - GizzyCatBella🍁 21:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Wait for what? BeŻet (talk) 09:50, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Look, I object to placing the tag now. It might appear to some that you are doing it because you didn't get your way when you nominated this article for deletion recently. Just pause for a couple of months, at least. Your AfD just ended a few days ago.[22]. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose - I do not think that the wording in the tag applies to this article. Reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention have been found already. No one is saying that the Daily Beast and others are not reliable, only that they may be somewhat biased. The tag was meant for such articles as Occupied Palestine and Syrian Golan Heights Advocacy Initiative, which is sourced only to blogs, social media and policy websites. In addition, I happen to have not understood the reasoning of the closer's closing remarks in the AfD discussion, because I think relisting this will only be an exercise in futility. Havradim leaf a message 22:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Something is severely wrong in some of the arguments above. Of course the notability tag both could and should be added immediately, there is nothing to "wait for" regarding tags. It is true we should wait a couple of months before relisting for AfD, but whenever an article needs tagging, tags should be added right away. I've never seen a suggestion to "wait" to add a tag, and can find no support whatsoever in WP policies for that suggestion. Jeppiz (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

• I think it constitutes an unhelpful tag when there are already multiple eyes on this article, all waiting for a better source to appear. Havradim leaf a message 20:27, 4 May 2022 (UTC)

Support adding the tag immediately. @Jeppiz: is correct, there's no reason to wait to add the tag. BetsyRMadison (talk) 21:21, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Support adding the tag - The subject gains more weight by having an entry re-established on Wikipedia. "In determining proper weight, we consider a viewpoint's prevalence in reliable sources, not its prevalence among Wikipedia editors or the general public. If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small minority, it does not belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it is true or not.I'm only interested in the much more tractable question is it encyclopedic and NPOV or not." J Wales -- My point is that his "Vanity" vocations hold no relevance - his blogging holds relevance only for the drama he was able to generate. The subject is not encylopedic so (at the least) a notablity tag needs to be added.71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC) <---  — User:71.203.10.104 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. -- anon. only account blocked for disruptive editing - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC) Oppose - AfD just ended a few days ago. There was no agreement to delete and there was no agreement on subject notability. An alleged lack of notability has not been established. The article needs some rest before a second attempt to get rid of it, especially by the same editor. - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment - GizzyCatBella put a misleading, erroneous, and false-tag on editor @71.203.10.104: so I scratched through it. That IP editor has been on wiki since 2020 [23]. And, since 2020, that editor has contributed to several, several, several topics. It is imperative that wiki editors refrain from mischaracterization and mislabeling of other editors. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella: Since several people expressed the need for the tag, it should be placed there and not removed until the concerns are addressed. BeŻet (talk) 14:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

What several people? I see 2 people (IP is SPA) Up to you my dear, but this is wrong what you are doing. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella's comment is false. The IP is not an SPA. Not even close to being an SPA. The IP has been on wiki since 2020 and has contributed to tons of different topics. Proof the IP is not an SPA is here [24]. Please be more careful to avoid mischaracterizing and mislabeling your fellow-editors. Thanks. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella: Could you please stop removing the tag when the issue is being actively discussed? You are confusing this with a content change, which needs consensus. This is a tag. Please return it. BeŻet (talk) 11:04, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@BeŻet

1 - It wasn’t not me who removed it [25]

2 - I don’t agree with you for the reasons explain to you already, the tag should be removed.

3 - You edit warring [26], [27] - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Please read Help:Maintenance template removal. I have consulted the Talk page to see if there's at least one other person who feels the tag should be there to avoid WP:TAGBOMB. There is no consensus regarding notability of Lira, therefore the tag is adequate. BeŻet (talk) 15:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I was the one who removed it, for a few reasons: 1. BeŻet boldly added it, then it was removed by GizzyCatBella, then it was removed again by BeZet. That last action should never have happened per WP:BRD. 2. It is true that 3 editors want it up and 2 do not (Jeppiz expressed an opinion but did not vote). On the other hand, the two editors who do not think it should be up have actively taken it down, for good reason (see #3). 3. The tag reads, Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention (emphasis mine). As anyone can see from the article, there are references [28] [29] which focus on the subject and go into great detail about him. The above sources (and more) are reliable and independent enough to be used in the article. BeZet boldly added it, with the explanation that There is no consensus regarding notability of Lira, therefore the tag is adequate. The flaw in this reasoning is, that cleanup tags are not for the purpose of affirming one side of a deletion discussion's feelings about an article. It is only intended to call attention to random editors to add reliable sources (as opposed to blogs or trivial mentions) to a poorly sourced article. WP:TAGBOMB says "Consider applying only the most specific, helpful tags" (emphasis mine). My conclusion here is that the placement of this tag is unhelpful (read Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems#Over-tagging, paragraph: Unhelpful tags). Any tag that was boldly added can just as easily be boldly removed unless a good explanation as to why it was placed there is forthcoming. Havradim leaf a message 02:08, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Correct, the tag should be removed. - GizzyCatBella🍁 02:14, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Your assessment is incorrect, and as the deletion discussion has shown, the notability of the subject has not been established - there is currently no consensus. This is exactly the sort of situations the tag was designed for. You can claim that "anyone can see from the article", but clearly the discussion has shown that not everyone agrees with you. This subject is disputed, and therefore the tag should be there. BeŻet (talk) 19:49, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

There is no consensus for deleting the article, and there is also no consensus for placing a tag (it was just removed by yet another editor). This is exactly the sort of situations the tag was designed for. Show me a guideline that states this. Tags are ugly, and need to be placed there for a purpose, and that purpose is to alert people that the article needs improvement. Was your intention of placing this tag to get the article improved? If so, and you see for yourself that this action was contentious, why don't you try to improve it instead? Havradim leaf a message 22:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Tags are used to indicate problems with the article. The obvious problem with this article is: Lira is not notable. Hence the 'not notable' tag. In fact, Lira doesn't even meet wiki's Basic Criteria for notability. Face it, Lira's 15 min of fame ended over 17 years ago with his failed books & failed film stuff. BetsyRMadison (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison Everything you wrote above is just your opinion that recently closed AfD [30] doesn’t confirm. The tag should be removed, there is no grounds for it anymore. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Everything you just wrote is just your opinion.
Whereas, everything I wrote can be found on wiki's Tagging guidelines here [31] "Tags are often used to indicate problems". Thus, as per wiki guidelines, the Tag is needed because the "problem" still exists & was not resolved. Thus, @BeŻet: is 100% correct by stating "the notability of the subject has not been established - there is currently no consensus. This is exactly the sort of situations the tag was designed for ... This subject is disputed, and therefore the tag should be there." BetsyRMadison (talk) 23:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

There is no consensus that problem still exists -->Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gonzalo Lira. This is your opinion (you keep repeating) that the problem exists. Do you understand that? - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

You're confusing "opinion" with "fact."
It is a fact that the "problem" still exists because it is a fact that the problem was not resolved. And @BeŻet: stated that fact perfectly, "the notability of the subject has not been established - there is currently no consensus. This is exactly the sort of situations the tag was designed for ... This subject is disputed, and therefore the tag should be there." And that is a fact, not an opinion. BetsyRMadison (talk) 23:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim - I believe you should seek assistance at Dispute resolution [32] as I view that being the best option to resolve this potential WP:OVERTAG issue here. - GizzyCatBella🍁 22:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

"Overtag"??? Lol! There's 1 tag. Surely to goodness you know 1 tag isn't "Overtagging." But I'm curious, if you want to start a DR and claim "overtag" for 1 tag; then why are you asking someone else to do it for you? BetsyRMadison (talk) 23:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

GizzyCatBella, this is not an Overtag situation, but maybe an Unhelpful tag situation. Regardless, all of this language comes from an essay, not a guideline. I personally don't think this is a case for DR just yet, I would rather wait and see what others have to say. Havradim leaf a message 23:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Sure, up to you. Perhaps RfC? - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

On second thought, I might not wait to file this. I am counting 5 for and 3 against, and BetsyRMadison is citing an essay (not a guideline) and BeŻet's own words, which is not very convincing to me. Havradim leaf a message 23:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim - Sadly, I believe there is no other way to bring this article under control. - GizzyCatBella🍁 23:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

So you think removing the not notable so help find anything, anywhere to make this guy appear notable Tag will suddenly make Lira notable. Lol! That's not how "notability" works.
And you never answered, since you, GizzyCatBella so desperately want to start a DR, then why are you having someone else do it for you? BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:05, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: You misrepresented my comment. I quoted straight from WP Tagging policy "Tags" are often used to indicate problems. Some Wikipedia editors object to the practice of tagging instead of fixing, but there is value in pointing out an article's problems. Tagging allows editors to specialize, teaches editors and warns readers about subpar or problematic content. It is better if people solve the problems they encounter themselves, but not everyone may be able to.
By the way, I think you may have counted wrong. BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: in what way, specifically, do you think it's an "unhelpful tag?" Please be specific. Thanks, BetsyRMadison (talk) 23:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I have opened a discussion regarding this matter at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Gonzalo Lira, please offer your comments there. Thank you. Havradim leaf a message 00:14, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: So you can't answer. Got it. BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I was busy filing the report and did not see your question. Please continue the discussion at the above link, thank you. Havradim leaf a message 00:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: So you still can't answer. Ha! Got it. BetsyRMadison (talk) 01:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

I think I have made my views on this subject very clear already in my comments above. All this going around in circles is exactly why I took it to dispute resolution, and trying to continue it here comes across as borderline disruptive. Havradim leaf a message 03:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

New article (The Bulwark)

Apparently, there is a new article entirely about Lira, published in The Bulwark [33]. It does add to his notability (the topic of the AfD). It brings up some additional elements that could be relevant to the article, such as repeated cases of anti-semitism, and frequently spreading baseless conspiracy theories (particularly about Covid), and a long list of pro-Russian lies about the current war. Jeppiz (talk) 12:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bulwark may be quite correct about Gonzalo; but it is a donation funded opinion journal.. Some of the things they get right; "Gonzalo Lira, a Chilean-American pro-Russia “social media influencer” and video blogger based in Kharkiv, Ukraine." Their description of him is more accurate than the article here. What will it take to change the article here to call him a video blogger? I would say their opinion-conclusion is correct as well; The good part about the attention he got, though, was that it offers a useful glimpse of the kind of Westerner who ends up in the pro-Kremlin camp: a conspiracy theorist who hates Western liberalism for empowering women and thinks white men are oppressed and exploited by sluts and Jews.

https://www.thebulwark.com/the-redpill-grifter-who-became-an-anti-ukraine-propagandist-gonzalo-lira/ 71.203.10.104 (talk) 12:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bulwark piece is already sourcing some things in the current article, but this could be expanded to include antisemitism and the possibility of his having staged his own disappearance (mighty suspicious that Lira tweeted about other pro-Russian "journalists" who have supposedly been killed/disappeared in Ukraine and then... disappeared only to show up completely fine a week later...).--Ermenrich (talk) 12:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the current wording about his disappearance says it well enough. As far as antisemitism goes, that is a serious charge. Is simply reposting something antisemitic? If a source would quote him actually saying something like "I hate Jews" then maybe I would reconsider. Even The Bulwark doesn't label him an antisemite. After all, they themselves admit that he has spoken out against Ukrainian Nazis. Havradim leaf a message 21:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Who "admits" that? The Bulwark is not endorsing the view that Lira is speaking out against "Nazis". You mean how he's spoken out against the Ukrainian Nazis headed by a Jewish president? As that outspoken Anti-Fascist Sergei Lavrov has told us, the worst anti-semites are Jews and also Hitler was a Jew, so I guess in calling Zelensky a "cokehead" Lira really has taken a stab at Nazism. Seriously, you're assuming way too much good faith with this guy. He does not represent some "you need to listen to both sides" balance to the "Western narrative" on Ukraine (=reality).

I would consider him sharing anti-Semitic comments, including one questioning the Holocaust while saying "Something I came across—what do you all think," worthy of inclusion among Mr. Lira's many regrettable statements.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

So are you implying that the Jews themselves are the worst antisemites? Lira's mother is a Lopez and a Hess - both are Jewish family names. [34] For all we know he is a marrano. Seriously, the "antisemite card" being tossed around this way by The Bulwark and others only renders the concept meaningless. Havradim leaf a message 15:25, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm not implying anything - I'm quoting the Russian foreign minister trying to justify their absurd claims that a Jewish man is a Nazi. Lira calling out "Ukrainian Nazis" is BS - he's just repeating Kremlin propaganda. Meanwhile the actual Nazis in Ukraine are looting, murdering, torturing, and genociding the Ukrainians away everywhere they go - except Lira says it's all a hoax.

So you're saying that calling the theory that there was no Holocaust "interesting" and retweeting a post saying that Jews are somehow sucking the life out of workers is not antisemitic?--Ermenrich (talk) 16:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I am saying that if you come across a situation where both sides are crying "Nazi", then there exists the possibility that a) everyone is a Nazi b) no one is a Nazi or c) one of the sides is a Nazi. In the interest of this discussion not turning into a forum, I want to just reiterate my position above that we ought not get sucked into this cynical game in regards to Mr. Lira's disposition, and I will just leave it at that. Havradim leaf a message 17:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Lol. It's reported that Gonzalo Lira is Catholic (not Jewish) The Bulwork highlights Lira's anti-Semitism and includes Lira's Holocaust denial rant on Lira's blog

The anti-Semitism is far from an isolated instance. Another /pol/ repost last November, shared with Lira’s comment, “Something I came across—what do you all think,” argues that if the Holocaust was real and the Allies really did save the Jews from the Nazis, Jews should be eternally grateful to white men; but since they constantly revile white people and “openly encourage non-Whites and non-gentiles to destroy their society and culture,” this means that either Jews are odiously ungrateful to their liberators and "Hitler was right," or the Holocaust is “just propaganda and lies.”

And it's very ironic that you allege editors are saying "Jews themselves are the worst antisemites" when it is Lira who's the one alleging 'Jews themselves are the worst antisemites' when he falsely & maliciously accuses a Jewish President of supporting "Nazis." BetsyRMadison (talk) 16:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Reminder about --> WP:BLP and WP:BLPDS - GizzyCatBella🍁 13:48, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Would you care to develop, GizzyCatBella? I think you'll find Ermenrich and I have been around for quite some time and, quite frankly, don't need policy reminders. For your information, WP:BLP means that information needs to be properly sourced. It doesn't mean it cannot be critical. What Bulwark writes is based on Lira's own publications, several of which are cited in their article. Jeppiz (talk) 15:17, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

Correct or not, I don't think Bulwark meets the criteria of a reliable source WP:RS . 71.203.10.104 (talk) 22:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

doesn't it fall under WP:PARTISAN in general?

The only ref to it I see on the RS board is here:

Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_303

Which is not about making a determination of the site itself, i just happen to agree it's very similar to something like the National Review, so usual caveats around WP:RSOPINION.

Perhaps better sources should be used - if they had existed, but it's political commentary about someone who threw himself into the (geo)political commentator ring, so I think there is some relevance. Cononsense (talk) 01:57, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

William Kristol (/ˈkrɪstəl/; born December 23, 1952) is an American neoconservative writer. A frequent commentator on several networks including CNN, he was the founder and editor-at-large of the political magazine The Weekly Standard. Kristol is now editor-at-large of the centre-right publication The Bulwark. Bulwark's opinion regarding GL mostly is true to fact; The description of GL as a blogger is spot on (and IMHO needs to be changed here, by all means retain filmmaker and author in his background information; that "experience" is all puffed up here as to provide "credibility" where there is none IMHO). Should any source that is pure opinion be relied upon to footnote a Wikipedia biography? What is the story here; A Youtube propagandist goes missing and then was found? The turn from man-o-sphere to target of opportunity? | Listened to his latest podcast - 1) Ukraine is going to be leveled, split, and absorbed in part by the east and in part by the west - I give that a P for possibility 2) US to blame - I see that as both propaganda and opinion to which he is entitled. 3) He has an opinion, a bit of sensationalist drama that gained some traction, that is it that is all. 4) 15 minutes of fame 71.203.10.104 (talk) 20:30, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

This seems like a useful source, but with opinion caveats. We shouldn't say he "is" antisemitic or misogynistic in Wikipedia's voice but we can report the facts about things that he said where noteworthy and with appropriate attribution. BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

There is a video online where he taunted another blogger's position points with soft porn of his Ukrainian girlfriend. The whole Coach Red Pill act/reality is clearly Misogynistic, go to the Ukraine and get some action and a pliant woman. Anti-feminist YouTube blogger - would be consistent with other Wikipedia pages. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 12:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Vote on Lede Change..

From

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American novelist,[2] film director, financial blogger, YouTuber, and commentator in the manosphere known as Coach Red Pill. A resident of Kharkiv, Ukraine, he started vlogging about the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine shortly after it began from what has been described by The Daily Beast as a pro-Putin perspective.[3] In April 2022, Lira alleged that he had been detained by the Security Service of Ukraine.[4]

To

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American blogger on Telegram and a video blogger on Youtube who lives as an expatriate in Kharkiv Ukraine. As of April 2022, Lira started blogging in support of the "provoked, justified, and righteous Russian invasion of Ukraine.' He opines that Ukraine will eventually be split and absorbed by Russia and Poland. In April 2022, Lira gained notoriety in Russian journals, and the blogosphere, when he "went missing" and it was alleged that he had been detained and killed by the Security Service of Ukraine in retaliation for his Anti-Volodymyr_Zelenskyy and anti-Ukrainian blogging. Lira was not killed and he continues to blog Russian war propaganda on Youtube. In justification of the Russian invasion Lira's opinions have been highlighted in the Russian propaganda outlet Pravda.

Prior to blogging about the invasion Lira was a misogynistic Man-o-Sphere commentator and self ascribed dating coach and advisor (Coach Red Pill) who espoused the position that women only desire money and children, and that Ukrainian women were both pliant and satisfied with their assigned gender roles. Prior to that, and In 2010, Lira began contributing blog articles to Zero Hedge, naked capitalism, Seeking Alpha and Business Insider, despite have no economic background, no financial education, and no business experience in the financial markets."

71.203.10.104 (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The green text are proposed & sourced additions:

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American blogger on Telegram, [a social media outlet known for being a "tool of conspiracy theorists," and "a cesspit of antisemitic content"] and a video blogger on Youtube who lives as an expatriate in Kharkiv Ukraine. As of April 2022, Lira started blogging in support of the "provoked, justified, and righteous Russian invasion of Ukraine [of Russia expanding it's 2014 invasion to include Russia's 2022 plan of installing a "pro-Kremlin puppet government in Kyiv" by toppling Ukraine's democratically elected government.] He opines that Ukraine will eventually be split and absorbed by Russia and Poland. In April 2022, Lira gained notoriety in Russian journals, and the blogosphere, when he "went missing" [during "Russia’s bombardment" of Kharkiv, Ukraine on April 15] . [With no proof,] it was alleged that he had been detained and killed by the Security Service of Ukraine in retaliation for his Anti-Volodymyr_Zelenskyy and anti-Ukrainian blogging. Lira was not killed and he continues to blog Russian war propaganda on Youtube. In justification of the Russian invasion Lira's opinions have been highlighted in the Russian propaganda outlet Pravda. BetsyRMadison (talk) 17:44, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The current lede is good as it is. The proposed wording above is too long-winded a lede for such a short article, and some of it is clearly not neutral. I am opposed to introducing sources which do not mention the subject unless absolutely necessary. Havradim leaf a message 19:40, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

The revisions look great.. I would omit "a social media outlet known for being a tool of conspiracy theorists" and a "cesspit of antisemitic content" because the article is not about telegram. Everything else about him eg Coach Red Pill, non notable books/film, and Financial Blogging can be in the content section of the article. The article posted about salon speaks to his financial blogging.

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a Chilean-American blogger on Telegram and a video blogger on Youtube who lives as an expatriate in Kharkiv Ukraine. As of April 2022, Lira started blogging in support of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Lira supports toppling Ukraine's democratically elected government. He opines that Ukraine will eventually be split and absorbed by Russia and Poland. In April 2022, Lira gained notoriety in Russian journals, and the blogosphere, when he "went missing" during "Russia’s bombardment" of Kharkiv, Ukraine on April 15th. With no proof, it was alleged that he had been detained and killed by the Security Service of Ukraine in retaliation for his anti-Ukrainian blogging. Lira was not killed and he continues to blog Russian war propaganda on Youtube. In justification of the Russian invasion Lira's opinions have been highlighted in the Russian propaganda outlet Pravda 71.203.10.104 (talk) 22:01, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

If you could run with the above compromise it would be great! 71.203.10.104 (talk) 22:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

It is not for you or anyone to decide that all of the subject's previous work e.g. novels, films, CRP etc. is not notable, and therefore somehow not suitable for the lede, because that is not what is in the sources. I don't understand this fixation you seem to have in labeling this person as a "blogger". A reread of WP:BLPBALANCE might be in order. Havradim leaf a message 23:42, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Because that is his main vocation is blogging and has been for many many years - since 2010; if he is notable for anything it would be blogging and video blogging. It is out of balance and proportion that he is listed primarily as a filmmaker and author; this is something that happened way back in 1997 and 2002; he is not notable (or known) for either vocation. Even the photo used with him behind a camera is outdated by decades. So yes.. he is a blogger that had a career change. Again, it is undue weight to say that he is a filmmaker-author first and blogger second. It simply is not true. ---- When vanity accomplishments are placed first, it provides a false sense of credentialing, which again creates an imbalance to truth and reality. (puffery) --- From what I can see the consensus is to make the change to blogger. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 00:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

That's all Lira is: a blogger. That's it. Since 2005, Lira's been a failed novelist, a failed film whatever who, for nearly the past 2 decades (17 years) is only "notable" and only known for blogging misogynist hatred against women, repeating anti-Semitic tropes, repeating Holocaust denying content, spreading pro-Russian propaganda that airs on Russia's-state-owned media propaganda outlet. What I don't understand, is why are you, or any editor, wanting to whitewash & sugar-coat the last 17 years of Lira's life by pretending he didn't do the things he did. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

ZeroHedge and conspiracy theories

I saw what I perceived to be problematic edits so I modified them, but BetsyRMadison reinstated them, so I am hoping you will address the issues here. Please explain how you know that Lira posts at Business Insider, ZeroHedge and Naked Capitalism on his own. Can you prove that he owns these websites and/or blogs or otherwise controls what they do and do not publish? Secondly, I am not sure what you found wrong with my version His thoughts were also reposted on Zero Hedge, a far-right blog accused of spreading pro-Russian conspiracy theories which acknowledges your concerns without going over the top. Your edit came across as less than neutral, especially since this is an article about Lira, not ZeroHedge. I don't understand why you removed the link to ZeroHedge, and at the same time included the CBS source which talks about it getting banned from Twitter (it has nothing to do with this article, Lira is not mentioned there, and the ban was overturned, so what exactly is your point for including all this here? People could have clicked on the link to find out all the details.) Finally, what is your point for writing, On 22 April, Lira alleged to vlogger Alex Christoforou that he had been detained by the Security Service of Ukraine after his family had lost contact with him on 15 April but he has not provided any proof to support his allegations. There is no need to repeat that he didn't provide any proof if it already used the word "alleged", which is only repeating the same thing. Either take out "alleged" or "he has not provided any proof" because this scheme works out to be overtly biased. Havradim leaf a message 00:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

agreed. a lot of background info about things like telegram, ZeroHedge, etc, make it sound like some aspects of a WP:COATRACK. Cononsense (talk) 00:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Salon is one of many sources for his financial blogging and it is accurate. He has done three types of blogging over the last twenty years.. his adult years. Financial, man-o-sphere and also Misogyny, Ukraine.. the majority of his career whatever he thinks will give him attention. I do agree with Havrdim on several points 1) Stick to the sources that speak to the subject. 2) The ethos of Zerohedge or Telegram holds no relevance; in fact it creates a fallacy of attacking the person by inferring that he is tarnished because he was featured on a tarnished platform. ----- The Lira entry was not notable thus it was removed from Wikipedia but recently something changed to make it notable (sort-of). What makes him notable was the drama of him becoming a missing-person in fringe and Russian propaganda outlets; The drama was so riveting that he was "pronounced dead." Nobody knows what happened, if anything. A truly notable blogger is "Bald and Bankrupt" who just got arrested in Russia and, unlike Lira, he has been featured in many mainstream outlets. I don't think we should make more of Lira either positively (regarding film/books) or negatively (by stating he was on tarnished platforms); he is what he is a not so notable blogger who dribbled in other vocations that did not hold notability on Wikipedia, but now does perhaps due to some unverifiable or invented drama . 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:04, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

PS support for the notability tag exists and it needs to be restated.. it was improper to remove the tag. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

You're mistaken about the "Coatrack" allegation. Look, if wiki editors want to allege Lira is "notable" because after he couldn't make it as an author or director (decades ago), he decided to spread misogynist content, conspiracies, repeat anti-Semitic content along with repeating "Holocaust denial" conspiracies, and pro-Russian propaganda (as described in the Reliable Sources: Daily Beast, Salon, the New Yorker, Firearm news, and the Bulwark here [35]; then it is incumbent on wiki editors to state the facts that the blogs he posts on are known for being filled with anti-Semitism, conspiracy theories, and pro-Russian propaganda. BetsyRMadison (talk) 03:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

the guy is an unsuccessful alt-fringe-blogger.

He constantly blogged about the "Tiffany Dover VAX Conspiracy" - it was the same nonsense where she was pronounced dead after receiving the Covid vaccine. He also "fights" other bloggers who are more successful in the same space such as Carl Benjamin to gain attention. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 11:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

1) All sources say Lira is a blogger. No reliable source claims Lira is a "journalist." Therefore wiki should not imply he is anything but what he is/was: a blogger.

2) No reliable source claims Lira is/was 'paid' for any of his blog posts he posted on any blog. Therefore, wiki should not imply he's anything but a blogger who posts stuff, like millions & millions of other people in the world. Nothing notable about being one of a trillion bloggers in the world.
3) Of Lira's blogging:

a) Lira wrote his own 'bio' on Business Insider & some the blogs he claims are "his" on BI are not his. Take the 1st one he lists here [36] titled "Welcome To The Subprime Debacle, Part 2." Lira didn't write that, he claims he did in his BI bio, but he didn't. The actual piece [37] shows some guy named John Mauldin wrote that.

b) The 2nd blog Lira claims is on BI, is not even published on BI. You go to the link & it directs you to Lira's personal blog here [38]. I could go on, but we all know that on wiki, the subject (here the subject is Lira) is never to be used as the RS.

c) Zero Hedge is a blog were anyone can publish their 'pro-Russia & conspiracy theory' stuff.

d) Zero Hedge is not & never has been an RS. That's why I removed the link; they're not an RS.

e) CBS is an RS. That's why I used the CBS link. The CBS link confirms Zero Hedge is a conspiracy theory blog. If editors on here want to allege Lira is "notable" because he posts blogs at a 'pro-Russian, conspiracy theory' blog, Zero Hedge, then naturally wiki must include those facts about Zero Hedge.

f) On Naked Capitalism "blogger" page, Lira is so NOT notable that on NC past "Valued Contributor" Lira is not listed here [39].

4) I never said he "owns" the blogs at Business Insider, Zero Hedge, or Naked Capitalism, so no, I won't try to "prove" something I never said.
5) I did not write, "On 22 April, Lira alleged to vlogger Alex Christoforou that he had been detained by the Security Service of Ukraine after his family had lost contact with him on 15 April but he has not provided any proof to support his allegations."
In fact, I think that whole sentence should be removed for being an unsubstantiated allegation (conspiracy) with no proof to support it. Wiki editors aren't suppose to post conspiracy theories and/or unsubstantiated allegations that are the foundation of a conspiracy theory
6) I wrote, "but he has not provided any proof to support his allegations" because Lira did not provide any proof.
You're mistaken to say an "allegation" means there's no proof to support the allegation. Many people who allege things can & do provide proof to support their allegation.
In fact, in US Courts all day, everyday, people do provide proof to support their allegations. So it's not 'bias' in any way to state the fact that Lira has provided no proof for his allegations. None. BetsyRMadison (talk) 03:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

We have secondary sources now for all the websites. We don't need to describe them more than briefly as they all have their own articles. Adding refs to articles that don't mention Lira is SYNTH (and also might be misleading as Zero Hedge has changed over time). BobFromBrockley (talk) 11:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I disagree and here's why. If wiki is going to allege Lira is "notable" because of Lira's anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying stuff he published at Zero Hedge between 2010-2013; then wiki obviously must explain the type of blog Zero Hedge is: an unreliable, conspiracy theory, pro-Russian propaganda, blog. Also, Zero Hedge has not changed over time. On Feb 2022 from Bloomberg news: "US Accuses Zero Hedge of Spreading Russian Propaganda" [40] "officials said Zero Hedge ... published articles created by Moscow-controlled media that were then shared by outlets and people unaware of their nexus to Russian intelligence.". If editors think Lira is notable then surely to goodness those same editors agree that there's no reason to sugar-coat Lira's sole reason for "notability" which is for the past 17 straight years: spreading hate (misogyny & anti-Semitism), spreading untruths, and spreading conspiracies. That's it. For that last 17 years, that's Lira's sole 'claim to fame.' BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison read WP:BLP. - GizzyCatBella🍁 14:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@GizzyCatBella, I return the comment you made to BetsyRMadison back to you, because your behavior here is starting to become problematic. When the article was up for AfD, you campaigned more actively than anyone else to keep the article. Now, when users try to improve it, you constantly oppose them. You seem to be under the erroneous impression that WP:BLP means articles about living persons cannot be negative, but that is not at all what BLP is saying. What the policy does say is that we need to be careful to use sources. What the discussions over the past few weeks have made clear is that the few available sources about Lira are very negative. One calls him a "sleazy dating coach", and several different sources detail his misogyny, bizarre conspiracy theories, antisemitism and so on. It's not flattering, but that's what the sources say, and then that is what the article will say as well. Not in Wikivoice, but based on the sources. It's very hard to understand your behavior here over the last few days, after you argued so strongly for a keep at AfD yet now you oppose extending the article based on the sources that exist. So instead of telling others to read WP:BLP, please read it yourself. If we are to have an article on a person, then that article will reflect the sources we have. Jeppiz (talk) 15:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Jeppiz - Source below where is Lira denying the Holocaust and quote it. This is a serious allegation. WP:BLP apply to talk pages as well. Articles should be written responsibly, cautiously and the material should not be poorly sourced. I believe you might benefit from guidance at WP:BLP also. - GizzyCatBella🍁 15:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

The source, the Bulwork highlights Lira's anti-Semitism and includes Lira's Holocaust denial rant on Lira's blog

The anti-Semitism is far from an isolated instance. Another /pol/ repost last November, shared with Lira’s comment, “Something I came across—what do you all think,” argues that if the Holocaust was real and the Allies really did save the Jews from the Nazis, Jews should be eternally grateful to white men; but since they constantly revile white people and “openly encourage non-Whites and non-gentiles to destroy their society and culture,” this means that either Jews are odiously ungrateful to their liberators and "Hitler was right," or the Holocaust is “just propaganda and lies.” . That is Lira's anti-Semitic and Holocaust denying content, as per the source. BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I take this to mean, if it is true at all (we are not given the full text, only The Bulwarks analysis of it) that either he thinks that Jews are odiously ungrateful to their liberators, or that the Holocaust is just propaganda and lies, not both at the same time, because in his view, they are mutually exclusive. So based on this source, it would be impossible to describe Lira as an "antisemite and Holocaust denier". Let us unpack this even further. He is claiming that Jews who were liberated from concentration camps (or their descendants) "constantly revile white people". Aren't European Jews in the United States classified as white? Is Lira asserting that they hate themselves? Further, I mentioned above that Lira's mother has two Jewish surnames. So, is Lira himself a "self-hating Jew"? (If you don't understand how a nominal Catholic can still be a Jew in secret, read Marrano). In any case, great care is needed when considering using any of this. Havradim leaf a message 02:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: Lira says either "Hitler was right" (anti-Semitism) for waging genocide on Jews or the Holocaust is "just propaganda and lies" (Holocaust denier). The source clearly highlights Lira as an anti-Semitic, Holocaust denier. You can personally analyze Lira anti-Semitism and Holocaust denials all you want as your own "original research" but your original research isn't allowed in the article.
Gonzalo Lira himself says he's Catholic, not Jewish. All sources I've seen say Lira is Catholic, not Jewish; So I don't know why you keep falsely claiming he's Jewish when he's clearly not Jewish. We have no idea what his mother's full name is. More important though is that the last name "Hess" does not mean you're Jewish & neither does the last name "Lopez"; ie., Hitler's Nazi pal Rudolf Hess "leading member of the Nazi Party in Nazi Germany. Appointed Deputy Führer to Adolf Hitler in 1933." ahh... Rudolf Hess wasn't Jewish & neither is Gonzalo Lira. BetsyRMadison (talk) 12:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I did not claim he is Jewish, I was only asking questions. And I reiterate my position that we cannot take The Bulwark's word for it when considering if the subject is an antisemite. They are clearly biased, and might have taken his words out of context. "Hitler was right" could mean right about economics or invading Poland. I would need to see the full text of his blog, and even then the whole thing would border on OR. What we would need is a mainstream source stating unequivocally that "Lira, an avowed antisemite and Holocaust denier ... Havradim leaf a message 17:56, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: We go by what the source reports. Using Lira's own words, the source highlights Lira's anti-Semitism and Lira's Holocaust denial content. Oh & thanks for finally admitting Lira is not Jewish. BetsyRMadison (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Read the source again. It brings up the spectre of "antisemitism" and only implies something about Holocaust denial. They are careful to not label him either of those things, justifiably so (probably due to libel concerns. Incidentally, we are bound by the same rules. So I suggest you drop it). Havradim leaf a message 18:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Havradim: We go by what the source reports. Lira wrote, "Hitler was right about them (Jews)." Using Lira's own words from Lira's Russian Telegram blog/page (here [41]) the source is clear and the source highlights Lira's anti-Semitism and Lira's Holocaust denial content. Lira wrote

If the Holocaust was real, yet Jews hate their liberators and their descendants, doesn’t that prove Hitler was right about them?

Or alternately, if Jews feel free to attack their liberators and their descendants, isn’t it reasonable to infer that maybe the Holocaust didn’t happen, and is just propaganda and lies?

No matter how you slice it, the source highlights Lira's anti-Semitism and Holocaust denials. Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 18:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I did read it, now I suggest you read it. Things to notice: Since 2005 (17 years) Lira is only "notability" for Lira's anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying content, and pro-Russian propaganda that he's blogged & vlogged about between 2010 - today, and it is all properly sourced. You see, BLP says information needs to be properly sourced. Properly sourced doesn't mean editors have to whitewash & sugar-coat facts, even if you, or I, or any other editor don't like the facts. What Bulwark writes about Lira's spreading misogyny, anti-Semitic, Holocaust denying content, and pro-Russian propaganda is based on Lira's own publications, several of which are cited in Bulwark's article. BLP does not says editors have to pretend Lira (or others) didn't do the things they did do, just that the things they did should be properly source - and they are properly sourced. BetsyRMadison (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

You sourced that to this -->[42] web-site. Is this an apropiate RS for such a serious WP:BLP allegations? - GizzyCatBella🍁 15:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

The content he produces is odious and he has been producing odious commentary for years. Here is an analog in Wikipedia of other folks blogging in similar space

... is far-right white nationalist and white supremacist podcaster, blogger, author, political commentator, and banned YouTuber who promotes conspiracy theories, scientific racism, eugenics, and racist views

and another;

is an American blogger, former pickup artist, and writer connected with the alt-right. .... has self-published more than a dozen sex and travel guides, most of which discuss picking up and having sex with women in specific countries. His advice, his videos and his writings have received widespread criticism, including accusations of misogyny, promotion of rape, antisemitism, homophobia, and having ties to the alt-right.

There is no reason to sugar coat documented reality regarding the long and documented history of odious conduct from University forward in favor of emphasizing a fantasy view of an accredited filmmaker, author, journalist, and/or blogger. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 15:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@IP - This might be true or not. You need solid sources (s) to be able too write such things about a living person. Your entire comment right now also appears to be in a serious violation of WP:BLP. The BLP policy applies to talk pages. The burden of evidence rests with the editor who writes the material. The material should not be added to an article when the only sourcing is tabloid journalism. When material is both verifiable and noteworthy, it will have appeared in more reliable sources. - GizzyCatBella🍁 16:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bulwark is a solid source. I notice you're not complaining about the real tabloid & known conspiracy theory, pro-Russian propaganda blogs: Zero Hedge & Naked Capitalism, used in the article. And I notice you're not complaining about the non-solid source, Firearms News. You're only complaining about the Bulwark.
An editor not liking the source because the source highlights Lira's 17 years of blogging misogyny, promotion of rape, antisemitism, Holocaust denial content, homophobia, Russian propaganda, etc. doesn't make it a "tabloid" & doesn't make it non-solid. BetsyRMadison (talk) 17:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Career missing chronology of Coach red Pill and Misogyny - His rebuttal of sexual assault charges at Dartmouth

His career is missing the chronology of "Coach Red Pill" and his misogynistic positions, treatment, and opinion of/on women.

Is a University Paper an acceptable source? If so, then his suspension from Dartmouth is very relevant since it ties directly into misogynistic blogging. The two life-choices are in fact the same in that he treats women as sub-humans.

https://www.thedartmouth.com/article/1995/02/my-education-at-dartmouth

"My freshman fall, I was accused of sexual assault and harassment by another freshman. I was brought before the Committee on Standards (COS), and though there was proof that I did not harass the woman in question and more than a reasonable doubt as to whether I assaulted her, I was suspended for three terms by the COS, having been found innocent of harassment but guilty of assault."

"It's easy -- and let's be honest here -- it's fun to support causes where everyone agrees, where everyone is showing support. Homophobes? Racists? Sexists? Elitists? Let's get 'em! Yes, it's fun and easy to be a part of Peter Pan's gang, flinging your slings and arrows at some bad old, distant, maybe even illusory Captain Hook."

He could have sued Dartmouth if he was not happy with the result of in house discipline; an avenue of appeal was open to him. Most reasonable people would defend a false finding on sexual assault that would follow and tarnish them throughout life. He claims to be the victim in TheDartmouth, his alleged victim would be further victimized in any rebuttal.

How should we handle a nefarious BLP? Is this person notable because they are notorious? There is not a single positive about this fellow in any reliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.10.104 (talk) 02:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

"notable because hey are notorious" ... good question. BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:30, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Appreciate help with change to Lede below; the idea is to assure that film-making and books are in the body of the article; with the emphasis where it should be in NPOV; fringe blogger. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 15:34, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Category?

Perhaps 'Category:Misogyny'?Xx236 (talk) 07:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

You can't be serious? Have you read Category:Misogyny? There is not a single name listed there. Nor is there a Category:Misogynists, for good reason. Havradim leaf a message 03:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Tuning the Lead

Gonzalo Lira López (born February 29, 1968) is a fringe Chilean-American blogger, YouTuber, and commentator. A resident of Kharkiv, Ukraine, he started vlogging about the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine shortly after it began from what has been described by The Daily Beast as a pro-Putin perspective.[3] In April 2022, Lira alleged that he had been detained by the Security Service of Ukraine, there were false assertions and assumptions that he was killed.[4]

Appreciate sources and footnotes to support the above. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 12:38, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Russia bombarded Kharkiv April 15 - when Lira wasn't blogging

@Ermenrich: deleted the fact that Russia was bombing Kharkiv, Ukraine, the place where Lira claims he blogs from. I added back in and here's why: It's important fact to include the "Russia’s bombardment" of Kharkiv, Ukraine on April 15 at the exact same time Lira's "family lost contact with him." Therefore, while the sources don't mention "Lira" by name (and no reason why they should, he's just a blogger like zillions of others) the sources do confirm & mention that Russia's illegal invasion & bombing in Kharkiv, that "killed ten civilians, including a 7-month-old child. Another 35 people were injured. Several residential buildings were damaged and destroyed." is the same place Lira claims he blogs from at the exact same time his family lost contact with him. BetsyRMadison (talk) 16:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison: We cannot say that. It makes the text insinuate that the reason Lira was absent was the Russian bombardment, and that's an insinuation we would be making, as it's not in the sources. That's not possible. It may be that it is the reason, or it maybe that it isn't, but it's not for us to speculate. Jeppiz (talk) 17:42, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Jeppiz: I disagree and here's why. Yes, it is in two of the article's sources: CNN & Denver Post, (source #19 & #20 in the article) both talk about Russia bombading Kharkiv at the exact same time, on the exact date Lira's "family lost contact with him" gives facts surrounding his living situation. (see article's sources #19 & #20 are here ).
Therefore, we are stating facts on the ground in Khariv on the exact same date Lira lost contact; not inferring, not insinuating, not implying -- only stating facts on the ground. Lira 'prides' himself on vlogging from inside a war zone, so in my view, there's no reason to eliminate the actual bombing, shelling, etc taking place around Lira when Lira lost contact with his family. Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 18:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Jeppiz, and I would suggest looking at our rules against WP:original research again. It doesn't matter if they happened at the same time. If our sources don't make the connection, we can't. And hey, Kharkiv is being bombarded more or less constantly.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ermenrich: and @Jeppiz: Ok, fair enough. I trust the judgement of both of you on this. Thank you both for hearing me out though. Best regards, BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@BetsyRMadison Where did you see these two sources you are using (CNN and Denver Post [43]) speaking or mentioning the BLP (Gonzales Lira)? If they do, you should be able to demonstrate that. - GizzyCatBella🍁 19:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC) To address the potential violation of the WP:BLP by the introduction of WP:OR I tagged the article accordingly. See [44] - GizzyCatBella🍁 20:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

References

Lira's "disappearance"

I see no reason to have a sentence about how worried a bunch of fringe bloggers were about his disappearance. This was a complete non-event: people lost touch with him on the 15th and he showed up again on the 22th, unharmed, making accusations that fit with the "Ukrainian Nazi government" stuff he spews (except I guess that he's alive). There is no reason to inflate this event by talking about who said what about where he was.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Only "fringe bloggers" cared, and then amplified, this drama. There is a dearth, actually there is not a single article I can find, of mainstream coverage about Lira's disappearance and reappearance. Drama at the "fringe" was the reason Lira was resurrected on Wikipedia, and it is the reason why folks are looking for credibility and credentialing where there is none.. Lira, a blogger, was removed from Wikipedia for lack of notability; and there are no mainstream sources to suggest that he is notable. The lack of notability, and the fact he is a sociopath, means there is really no article here (unless you want to describe his nefarious activities, and that is all in the primary source content he spews.) The "drama" will cool down over time and I am sure the entry will be deleted when folks on the fringe stop spinning around his nonsense. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 23:40, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Not a single article you could find? Here is one for you [45]. - GizzyCatBella🍁 00:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

You mean Cyprus_Mail where the "right wing" newspaper friendly to Russia - in a country providing refuge to Russian Oligarchs and their wealth; was purchased by a lawyer who was previously found guilty of bribing the deputy attorney general, in a country with 1.5 Million people and change. Criticism came when articles referring to his conviction were removed from the website of the newspaper the day after ownership of the newspaper. This is hardly a mainstream source by any means.. "The story" was written by unnamed staff. ------ I would say that the body of text that the article supports should be removed. There is "CNN" who translated Russian State Media (propaganda) to provide insight into dis-information; Russian State Media loves Lira. I was not able to find a single quality or reliable mainstream source about Lira, he is not notable in the mainstream.. 71.203.10.104 (talk) 00:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Yup, that's the one, Cyprus Mail, the pro-Russian tabloid. It's kind of weird that any wiki editor would claim the Cyprus Mail tabloid is any way 'reliable.' But, here we are. BetsyRMadison (talk) 01:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't think there is any evidence that it's a tabloid or pro-russian. What's your evidence of that?

See also Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_375#Cyprus_Mail_on_Gonzalo_Lira

either way, the bulwark article also talks about Lira's disappearance and reappearance. Cononsense (talk) 02:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

The Bulwark article LAMBASTS LIRA every opinion published LAMBASTS LIRA. Bulwark is a site of Political Opinion, the Cypress Mail is a Political Site as well. These are not quality or neutral sites, There is NO neutral sources of record to be found. Novelist-Filmmaker are The main vocations listed in this article yet they are not his main vocation (not notable not relevant, not contextually true) yet they are listed first in his bio because they puff him up, this entry is lying to its readers with a contextual falsehood. He is a fringe blogger with fringe and secondary sources covering him.. He is notorious for his video's and blogs on fringe but he is not notable. Find a mainstream source and I will reconsider this conclusion. PS" He is blogging about Financial Collapse now. 2022.05.09 Get Ready For The Economic Collapse71.203.10.104 (talk) 12:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Cypress Mail seems to be one of the two major newspapers in Cypress, so not sure why people are characterising it as a 'political site'. I don't think the reporter in that piece examined Lira's claims critically, nor did they did seem to contact the authorities in Ukraine or the US Embassy (of which Lira is a citizen, and actually has a major presence in Ukraine unlike Chile), but that's not here nor there, because Wikipedia is a tertiary source.

I agree that this guy's main vocation is no longer a film maker or novelist. but keep in mind problems with WP:RECENTISM. despite my own personal beliefs, there seemed to some relevant high quality sources as pointed out by various people in the AfD. Cononsense (talk) 13:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree 100% with you Ermenrich. BetsyRMadison (talk) 00:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Comment Most of the above discussion seems off-topic to me. The point is not whether or not Lira is notable. The point is how much detail we need to give his "disappearance". I do not believe it deserves more than a sentence saying that he "disappeared" from the 15th to the 22nd, then claimed to have been detained. The fact that various bloggers speculated on his death, its connection to "Ukrainian Nazis" and the "Kyiv government", and that the spokeswoman for the Russian MFA hoped he was OK are not worthy of inclusion in this article. He is OK, the story was picked up in exactly two (probably) reliable sources, the Cyprus Mail and the Bulwark, the latter of which suggests Lira might have staged the whole thing. A massive media event this is not, nor is it particularly notable. If mainstream sources had speculated on his disappearance, than it would be worth including.--Ermenrich (talk) 13:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ermenrich: Once again, I agree with you 100%. For wikipedia to promote, propagate, and spread the unfounded blatant conspiracy theories from known Russian propagandist-bloggers (Ritter etc) is nutty, disgusting, & unbecoming of wikipedia. BetsyRMadison (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

While acknowledging your concerns Ermemrich, I am going to have to disagree with you here. We don't have much to go on with this subject as it is, and his disappearance/detention/arrest/slight of hand (call it what you will) generated a lot of interest and was noted in many sources. I don't see that including some details about it is somehow beyond the pale, and besides, there are a few more wikilinks that go with it, which is never a bad thing. Havradim leaf a message 17:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

It only "generated a lot of interest" among Lira's fellow Russian propagandists who all ended up with egg on their face when their conspiracies where exposed as out-right lies in less than 4 days. BetsyRMadison (talk) 17:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree w/ this viewpoint. It's not a very large portion of the article and reflects the coverage, so I don't think WP:UNDUE or anything applies. To me, if it the whole thing is a hoax (and I have my own personal suspicions, but there is simply no way to tell right now w/o more coverage), it actually interests me because of the role of disinformation in this conflict. Cononsense (talk) 23:49, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

1) He is not notable 2) The only thing in the fringe "Echo Chamber" was his "abduction" and "resurrection" to the fringe he is notable. 3) There are no mainstream sources - the whole article is supported by questionable sources all of which "call him out" for being evil and bizarre blogger 4) His treatment is not consistent to context "WP:Don't lie" which has nothing to do with the call for recentism, it is actually just puffer 5) I think we should wait a month or two and take another vote on article deletion 71.203.10.104 (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

The archived webpages are better than the news.

The archived webpages of his YouTube channels that I have added show that he has purged both "Coach Red Pill" and "Gonzola Lira" channels. This was removed because they are "Lira's personal blogs", but that's wrong since they are no blogs but YouTube channels, and the pages were archives thereof, not direct links. Metro Siberia (talk) 22:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC) ----<--- — Metro Siberia (talk) joined wikipedia today, immediately removed the 'notability Tag' & has made few or no other edits outside this topic. BetsyRMadison (talk) 01:59, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

YouTube videos (video bloggers) are not WP:RS.--Ermenrich (talk) 22:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

They might be useful as external links, but definitely not as inline citations. Havradim leaf a message 22:16, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

If it's the subjects YTC, it could have some WP:ABOUTSELF use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Kharkov, Isreal, and Socks

Looks to me that Wikipedia is being used as a propaganda tool. 73.23.68.218 (talk) 18:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Change to YouTube channel

Recent edits changed the YouTube channel from this to this. Can anyone confirm that the 2nd is indeed his channel as well. Should both be listed? --ZimZalaBim ^talk 21:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

He has had multiple channels, and Avica1998 changed it to his current one which is "Gonzalo Lira II", which I think makes sense. Havradim leaf a message 15:57, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

When he was kidnapped then they stole all his social media accounts and passwords from him. That's why he had to restart fresh new ones for all his social media. Mathmo ^Talk 15:03, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

You mean "if he was kidnapped". We have no source for any of that besides Lira himself and his pro-Kremlin fellow travelers. Also, when a government seizes someone, it's generally called "arresting".--Ermenrich (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

What evidence do you have of him lying? If he did, then he went to a lot of trouble to do it! (including throwing away all his social media accounts! wtf, you seriously think he did that just for a lie?? That's a major sacrifice! You don't do that unless you're forced to) And got a lot of other people involved in the very elaborate plan too? No, that's not reasonable. And yes, when government "arrests" opposition journalists (or politicians etc) who they don't like, that does indeed come across to me as "kidnapping".Mathmo ^Talk 18:07, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Former dispute resolution

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard/Archive_99#Talk%3AGonzalo_Lira 666hopedieslast (talk) 10:43, 13 July 2022 (UTC)