Jump to content

Talk:Thomas Matthew Crooks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 7 September 2024

The person who donated $15 to democratic party was a 69 year old with the same name. The 21 year old who shot at Trump did not donate to the Democratic party. The shooter was a registered Republican. 107.161.193.56 (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. C F A 💬 18:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a false claim that began on Twitter/X. Please see this CBS News article on the matter. It addresses the false claim, and states: In fact, Federal Election Commission records show that the Bethel Park address on the $15 donation, earmarked to Progressive Turnout Project, is the same street address and ZIP code where the gunman lived.
No reliable source that I have seen is contesting that Crooks made the donation. If you have one, please provide it. GhostOfNoMeme 14:53, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 15 September 2024

The reference to his donation to a "voter turnout group" should be edited to specify that ActBlue was the donation recipient. 2603:6080:E00:4F67:5196:445E:87BC:A0FE (talk) 22:26, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: § Political activities already explains that the donation was made through ActBlue but to the Progressive Turnout Project. I don't think this level of detail is necessary in the lead. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Couldn't it be changed to "In January 2021, he donated $15 to the political action committee ActBlue."? Seems less verbose. DarmaniLink (talk) 06:14, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Change extended protection to semi-protection

Why?

- It's been 2 months all of the vandals are probably gone

- The amount of edits are slowing down anyways

- 2 edit requests

- Why does it even need protection??? 2D Is Better Than 3D (talk) 03:31, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are looking for WP:RFPP to have this discussion, though don't be surprised if it is rejected due to the problems caused when it wasn't protected. --Super Goku V (talk) 18:10, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I attempted to request it and was told to go through arbcom. Not worth the effort. DarmaniLink (talk) 23:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I tried getting it decreased too but they sent me to like three different places. Why would vandals care about Thomas Crooks? His assassination attempt was swept under the rug. 2D Is Better Than 3D (talk) 08:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2D Is Better Than 3D, your entirely unsupported and spurious crank "swept under the rug" comment is, ironically, a powerful argument to maintain the protection. Cullen328 (talk) 08:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
??? News outlets pretty much forgot the assassination attempt (ex. no new details), the feds were in on it, it was a massive secret service failure. What? Now they're trying to mess with me on other sites. 2D Is Better Than 3D (talk) 04:03, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

political views

I see that the comments made by the fbi of the assassin's supposed comments on social media are stated in the article - but I don't see anything in the article reporting that the head of Rumble came out afterwards and stated that they were the social media outlet being spoken of and that the fbi had lied about the contents of those posts. Since neither the fbi or rumble has provided proof, should not the entire subject be removed or both included? 99.33.126.209 (talk) 01:14, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence Trump Was Shot

The article mentions several times that Trump was shot or hit in the ear directly by a bullet, with the only source being a news article the day of the attack. There is no direct evidence that Trump was struck by the bullet or a fragment. The origin of injury to his ear is pure speculation (debris, bullet fragment, struck by a tackling secret service member, etc.). It can simply be said that he was shot at and obtained an unspecified injury to his ear. 76.70.96.214 (talk) 19:15, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many reliable sources say that Trump's ear was grazed by a bullet and no reliable source that I am aware of says that his ear was not grazed by a bullet. Unless you can furnish such sources, the wording will not be changed. Cullen328 (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cullen328 Then perhaps those sources should be added, rather than just a link to an article about the shooting. 76.70.96.214 (talk) 19:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
References are not required in the lead if present in the body. See the BBC reference, currently #40. Cullen328 (talk) 20:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]