Talk:Kate Leth

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kate Leth. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150619001407/http://comicsalliance.com/category/kate-or-die-2/?nav to http://comicsalliance.com/category/kate-or-die-2/?nav

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Misandry
Her misandry should be included — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheZelos (talk • contribs) 17:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * If there are reliable sources criticizing her, sure, but there aren't any I've found as of yet, even from a simple search of "kate leth misandrist" or other similar searches. Reliable sources are the name of the game on Wikipedia, so they are what determine what is on the main page and other pages. --Historyday01 (talk) 18:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I have added a sourced controversy section. Please propose improvements. Londondare (talk) 15:45, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Eh, neither of those sources is a reliable source. The Know Your Meme page is written by a user which says "Banned" next to their name (presumably meaning they were banned from Know Your Meme), so that significantly lowers the reliability. So removing the section. Bounding into Comics has been described by editors here as "nothing more than a glorified fan site with little editorial control", and that better sources should be used "if possible", and here as not having "the reputation for fact-checking and accuracy". I stand by what I said in my comment in December 2021 and a quick look at both links above don't provide any reliable sources, from what I can see. While her views may be criticized on social media (as is the case with many people), we don't want to fall into WP:BLPGOSSIP or WP:GRAPEVINE, to name two guidelines, reliable sources are needed to add a section like "controversy". Historyday01 (talk) 19:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Those tweets themselves are reliable source, aren't they? Would you agree if I provide her tweets are a source of what she said in her tweets? Londondare (talk) 09:18, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Tweets are self-published sources. Stop trying to shoehorn this subject into this page. Historyday01 (talk) 12:51, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Shoehorn? That is just your point of view. How about https://www.centreformalepsychology.com/? Is that source reliable enough? Londondare (talk) 08:03, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I've seen people try and shoehorn topics like that into various pages, which can get tiresome, sometimes people with a political axe to grind (not saying that is the case in this instance) to do so. I'm fine with being critical of Leth, its just that I haven't seen any reliable sources be critical of her (for better or worse), only chatter on social media (which is not very reliable when it comes to this), comments from those who detest High Guardian Spice, or unreliable sites. Looking at the site you mentioned, their ONLY source about Leth's statements is the Bounding into Comics link, which I already noted is unreliable. In addition, only ONE sentence of that article, which I linked to in the previous sentence, is even about Leth. The rest of the article is about misandry. As I've said before, reliable sources are the name of the game on here and I will continue to say that. Historyday01 (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I think you are doing a good work. Thanks. Londondare (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2023 (UTC)