 | Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Pizzagate conspiracy theory. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed. |
To view an explanation to the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question.
Q1: Why does Wikipedia say that Pizzagate is "debunked"?
All known reliable sources say the theory was either proven to be false or debunked. Our neutrality policy and our guideline on fringe theories explicitly warn us against presenting a false balance of unsupported and supported claims.
Q2: But what about all the evidence collected on social media?
Our policies prohibit us from engaging in original research, or from using material drawn from user generated content. This includes most blogs and social media sites such as Reddit, Facebook, and 4chan.
Q3: How about the Wikileaks e-mails?
The Wikileaks e-mails are primary sources, and we are required to be extremely cautious with them when using them to make assertions about living people. Extensive use of primary sources is prohibited by our policy prohibiting original research.
Q4: Why doesn't this article simply present the evidence and let readers decide for themselves?
This article is about allegations that living people have committed exceptionally heinous crimes. As such, we are legally and ethically obliged to remove potentially defamatory material and to avoid even the suggestion that these people have committed any crimes without credible allegations supported by exceptionally reliable sources. Users who persistently or egregiously violate this policy may be blocked from editing. Additionally, it is our purpose to build an encyclopedia. This means documenting all aspects of the subject, including summarizing any conclusions on the subject made by reliable sources.
Q5: Why isn't the article called simply "Pizzagate"?
Due to the "-gate" suffix implying some sort of genuine scandal, letting the name stand alone may unintentionally lend credence to an unsupported conspiracy theory.