Anyone who has actually listened to him knows this. Wikipedia needs to fix this. A single NY Times article as a citation to prove Tim is right wing is pathetic. At most Tim is a classical liberal who agrees with some conservative policies. Get it right Wikipedia. 2607:FB91:129F:4C56:545A:391D:F7B9:EF0 (talk) 20:51, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Please provide reliable sources to support your point. EvergreenFir (talk) 21:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems like a reasonable description based on his comments. Certainly members of the Right are not in 100%s agreement on everything and may side with progressives on some issues. That doesn't mean they are left wing. TFD (talk) 01:57, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed; Matt Walsh (political commentator) is described as right-wing. To put Pool in the same category as Walsh is preposterous. Even Michael Knowles is only described as conservative. NYT is left-leaning so of course Pool will be perceived more conservative than he actually is. Plus NYT doesn't even back up why they believe Pool is right-wing, the article just uses "right-wing" to attract clicks and fear monger (liberal media frequently uses the term right-wing for any conservative leaning person to stoke fear and demonization). It shouldn't be up to us to find "reliable sources" it should be up to NYT to prove their case why they slapped that label on him. Also, why is Wikipedia using sources people have to pay to view? 142.116.121.165 (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed; Matt Walsh (political commentator) is described as right-wing. To put Pool in the same category as Walsh is preposterous. That's some of the most brazenly sophistic arguments I've ever seen. Two people can be right-wing without being interchangeable in their views. Plus, it's not like there's much to distinguish between Pool and Walsh these days especially when it comes to peddling hatred against the LGBT community. Tim Pool actually called the victims of the LGBT bar shooting groomers; even Matt Walsh didn't go that far. 177.134.220.205 (talk) 01:26, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Just because Pool and Walsh agree on a few things here & there doesn't mean they are both right wing. They both tend to make provocative tweets which again don't prove they are politically aligned. You can argue Pool is conservative and Walsh right-wing, that would be better. Pool is anti-death penalty. He is pro-choice (through the first trimester which 90% of abortions are). He uses the pronouns of transgender people that they want to be called. He is much more libertarian than Walsh is. And no Pool didn't call the victims groomers, you are blatantly misinterpreting his tweet(s) in bad faith. 142.116.121.165 (talk) 02:34, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Also want to say that at the very least, calling him right-wing in the introduction using a source that simply just calls him right-wing in the headline and nothing to base that on is unwarranted. In the political views section, it could say "The New York Times has labelled Pool as right-wing". 142.116.121.165 (talk) 02:36, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Conservatives are right-wing, so your proposal amounts to establishing a distinction without a true difference. Plus, our policy is to reflect what reliable sources say. The NY Times, a top notch reliable source, called Pool not a conservative, but right-wing, so your proposal constitutes original research. And guidelines require that we use reliable sources without attribution, so your last proposal violates that policy. You're lucky that this entry doesn't describe Pool as an extreme right-winger, because that's what the NYT actually calls him. 177.134.220.205 (talk) 03:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Btw, here's how the Institute for Strategic Dialogue describes Tim Pool's comments on the shooting[2]:
Tim Pool, a verified ‘independent journalist’ with more than 1.5 million followers on Twitter dubbed a ‘superspreader’ of 2020 election disinformation by the Universities of Stanford and Washington, insinuated that the mass shooting was justified due to Club Q hosting a ‘grooming event’ being held on the same day.
In another article on the shooting, NBC News includes Tim Pool in a list of right-wing influencers who engaged in anti-LGBTQ rhetoric before and after the shooting.[3] So it's not just the NYT that has called Pool that. And honestly, that Tim Pool is right-wing should have been included in the entry long ago. This only didn't happen because of brigading on the part of a cadre of editors who work to whitewash entries on the American far-right. They have been successful in banishing from the entry any mention of Pool's views on right-wing mass shootings and his influence on mass shooters, but I guess they decided that after that NYT article, removing the right-wing descriptor was untenable. 177.134.220.205 (talk) 13:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- All right-wingers are conservative but not all conservatives are right-wing. Megyn Kelly is not right-wing, nor is Dave Rubin, and definitely not Tulsi Gabbard (although she could arguably be an independent). Either way you are well aware what the "-wing" implies, a greater extreme. And not all liberals are left-wing either. It could depend on how pedantic you want to be, but it's clear these words are not synonyms. If they were the same thing, why does Wikipedia use "right-wing" and "conservative" for different people? You are saying they are the same thing, so why does Wikipedia need to use both? And as far as I'm aware, Wikipedia editors are allowed to use synonyms for words used in sources. So by your logic it would be acceptable to label Pool as conservative in the article as well. Lastly,
- And the Club Q shooter was not right-wing (or at least not found to be), so that's a generalization on your part to claim all of Pool's takes on mass shootings were done by right-wingers. 142.116.121.165 (talk) 19:41, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Tim Pool's commentary on the shooting, made before the nonbinary story went public, was clearly based on the belief that the shooter was an "anti-grooming" crusader. So yes, Tim Pool thought at least initially the killer shared the same concerns as he did. Anyway, the Club Q shooter has been found to have moderated a neo-Nazi forum that hosted videos of right-wing violence, including the racist Buffalo shooting, and his close ones seem to doubt his nonbinary claims, which had not been made before the killings...
- I've never heard the idea that conservatives are not all right-wing. If that was the case, left-wing conservative would have been a familiar phrasing, which it is not; it's considered by most everyone a contradiction in terms.
You're also wrong when you say all right-wingers are conservative. Some are libertarian. And you noticed Pool's libertarian leanings yourself, so how can you claim now that "conservative" is a better drscriptor for him than "libertarian"?
- It's in any case baffling that you're still on this hill. We have two reliable sources, the NYT and NBC News, describing Pool as right-wing rather than conservative. You need to make peace with this fact, as we can't trample on reliable sources to follow your original research, no matter how flawless your logic supposedly is... 177.134.220.205 (talk) 23:27, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Left-wing conservatism obviously is not a thing because conservative and right-wing are terms given to people on any right leaning side of the aisle, from center right to far right. Conservatives can indeed be right-wing, but that doesn't mean all conservatives are, and that in itself makes them distinguishable from eachother. A great many people share my sentiments so I wouldn't call it "baffling". I'd like to mention NYT is obviously a left-leaning website, and since Wiki deems them reliable and non-partisan that means on this website, anything they say goes.
- Also quite weird the shooter hosted a website that showed right-wing violence, you would think someone who is biased in favour of the right would want to hide that type of content. Perhaps the shooter didn't have any actual ties or sense of personal belief in right-wing ideology; maybe history of, and depictions of violence from that side of the aisle just intrigued him. But that's just my opinion of course. 142.116.121.165 (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have been watching tim pool on an almost daily basis for about 10 years. he used to say he was independent, or even socially liberal. he still says he i socially liberal, but when discussing republican policies, he started saying "we" some time in the last year (i think around when he had doug mastriano on his livestream).
so while i'd like to be able to take him at his word, i also listen to what he says, and he identifies with right wing positions even if he says that right wing isn't a label he wants. BigMouthCommie (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Then go publish that in a reliable source, and you have fulfilled the minimum condition for your position being considered in Wikipedia. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:57, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- doesn't the article already reflect the sentiment: it identifies him as right wing. i don't think i need any sources to leave the article as it is, do i? BigMouthCommie (talk) 19:07, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Oops. I did not read your second paragraph as a whole. Sorry. --Hob Gadling (talk) 19:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- The reason he says "we" alot is because his guests tend to be conservative/right-wing. But you are implying his guests are right-wing by default. They are a mix of independents, conservatives and right-wing people (and sometimes liberals even). But in the context of "we" he generally is referring to the conservative movement. I wouldn't mind if Pool was considered a conservative on Wiki, but right-wing definitely creates certain preconceived notions about people. 142.116.121.165 (talk) 19:23, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- this can't possibly be an explanation, because i don't watch his livestream or interview segments: i only get his news-read segments, where he is the only subject of the video, and he identifies with right-wing policy by saying "we" as in "we need to fight the cult on this or that".
- i don't think it's a "conservative movment", either. i think it's most accurate to say "right-wing," though political affiliation does seem amorphous and ambiguous when we try to find the edges of ideologies. i could support **not** calling him right wing, and perhaps using some other descriptor, but if the change were to be to "conservative" then we'd need sources that actually say that. right now, the sources say "right wing".commie (talk) 20:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Do any WP:GREL sources describing his ideology since 2020 use terms other than right-wing, far-right, or conservative? Llll5032 (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
|