Talk:StoneToss

the "sources" are completely not saying he IS a neo-nazi, only that some calll him that-

[6]- https://www.populismstudies.org/dog-whistles-vs-slide-whistles-humor-as-weapon-and-resistance/ has 1 pharaghraph on him- here it is in full In the memesphere, the American webcomic StoneToss has attracted controversy for its Holocaust-denial dog whistlesand other semi-coded references to white supremacist, homophobic, and misogynist thinking. On sites like Reddit (often politically problematic in its own right), critics have parsed racist, sexist tropes veiled in “edgy humor.” One reaction among leftist groups has been to appropriate and “remix” StoneToss comics (Gilmour, 2021), with what my son calls “layers of irony” that may escape not only less sophisticated populists but even older progressives like me. The “antifastonetoss” page includes completed remixes, blank-thought-bubble templates, and test runs for community feedback. Subreddit links and critiques of source StoneToss comics abound, as do comments that, under their clever snark, show real concern for the damage hateful content can do, and that offer what might incite a Gen Z eyeroll if I say this: kindness, as in “Trans people are biblically accurate angels.” - I am sory but the Writers SON is not what we use as source in Wikipedia. Redit users are not sources for such a conversation ending claim as "neo-nazi"

[4]- https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2024/03/25/musk-x-lawsuit-slapp-center-digital-hate/ the artical is about Twitter lawsuit, Stontoss is again only in 1 pharaghrph here it is in full -Caraballo experienced that last week when her X account was banned after she amplified the identity of anonymous comic artist StoneToss, whom some people describe as a neo-Nazi. (After this article published, the administrator for the StoneToss website said the artist disavows the neo-Nazi label.) The platform cracked down on mentions of the user’s supposed identity and changed the terms of service to prohibit naming the person behind an anonymous account. (Caraballo’s account has since been reinstated.)- As we can see- a **respected** publishing made clear discaimer that this is nothing but what "some say" and clearly explained this is not a categorical explanation. nor a factual thing. The artical ends with this discaimer- clarification A previous version of this article described the comic artist StoneToss as a neo-Nazi. After the article was published, the administrator of the StoneToss website contacted The Post to disavow that label. The article has been revised to reflect that use of the label regarding StoneToss is a matter of debate.-- So the WP acnulages that this was a mistake- and more importanntly - he article has been revised to reflect that use of the label regarding StoneToss is a matter of debate.

[5]- https://gnet-research.org/2020/10/29/whats-in-a-meme-the-rise-of-saint-kyle/ The artical is on Kyle Rittenhouse- and the claim is that his meme's(Rittenhouse's) were on some subjects that other meme makes did- again Stonetoss is only in 1 pharaghraph - Other such “crossover” events include a meme complaining about the NFL kneeling controversy regarding Colin Kaepernick, a few allusions to the “Boogaloo” modality, an encroachment of “patriot” militia references, use of comic characters from the crypto-Nazi cartoonist Stonetoss, multiple connections to Back the Blue/Thin Blue Line adherents, and even some allusions to college campus-bound conservative activist group Turning Point USA.- the Colin Kaepernick issue was a maojr issue in usa, thosends of not milions of memes were made on it- and saying Stontoss is a neo-nazi cus he made a meme about a hot topic and also a murdered made them is beyond ridiculous- and most importantly does not hold to any wikipedia strandart.

[3]- https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-x-blocked-journalists-researchers-neo-nazi-cartoonist/- headline- Elon Musk's X Is Suspending Accounts That Reveal a Neo-Nazi Cartoonist's Alleged Identity Researchers and journalists have been blocked on X from sharing the alleged identity of the neo-Nazi cartoonist Stonetoss.- first and for most another respected publishing stating the fact that this is nothing more that aligation this artical is behined a paywall- but the fact of the matter that the headlline it self proves this is aligation

So i ask again- did anyone actauly read any of this so far?? this can not be written like this on Wikipedia- we are un-biasd and source based. i can get if we only change this to "alleged neo-nazi"- but to write "StoneToss is a pseudonymous American neo-Nazi political cartoonist" with 4 sources that ALL say he is not one, at best an Aleged one, is misinformation on the most basic form of it- and can not hold to any Wikipedia standard-

I formerly request this will be changed to at least "alleged" if not out right remved as it is un-based and completely alleged by some redit and twitter people. this is meme and satire and joke- we all know too well some don't like it- and WE as Wikipedia can not participate in such behavior. Dotan il89 (talk) 09:42, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Refer to the previous RFC at Special:PermanentLink/1216015718#RfC:_first_sentence where more sources were looked at then just the ones you quote. TarnishedPath^talk 09:45, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

Elon Musk's X Is Suspending Accounts That Reveal a Neo-Nazi Cartoonist's Alleged Identity Researchers and journalists have been blocked on X from sharing the alleged identity of the neo-Nazi cartoonist Stonetoss.- first and for most another respected publishing stating the fact that this is nothing more that aligation this artical is behined a paywall- but the fact of the matter that the headlline it self proves this is aligation - bolding the word "alleged" here is either intentional dishonesty or a failure to actually read the text. Wired chose to apply the label of neo-Nazi to StoneToss in both the title and body of the article, and the use of the word "alleged" is clearly used by the author in reference to the allegations that StoneToss is a particular person, not in relation to any ideological label.

Cherry picking like this is not going to change the consensus on this. All reliable sources that discuss StoneToss's political ideology use similar terminology (far-right, alt-right, neo-Nazi, crypto-Nazi, etc) - meanwhile, there are no reliable sources that refute these labels. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and is routinely referred to in reliable sources as a duck, Wikipedia is going to call it a duck. Ethmostigmus 🌿 (talk | contribs) 10:01, 17 August 2025 (UTC)

How absurd. Contrast Wikipedia's treatment of Caraballo, a guy who made threats against Supreme Court justices and advocates for left wing terrorism, against a cartoonist who has no ties to extremist orgs or involvement in violent rhetoric. Caraballo's rhetoric isn't even referenced on his page. Wikipedia is a left wing aggregator - it should drop the intellectual dishonesty and acknowledge the viewpoint bias. ~2026-49865-0 (talk) 18:16, 23 January 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedia has no obligation to conform to your biases. Intilyc (talk) 19:20, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Or yours. If people claim he’s a NeoNazi, the article should reflect that he is “an alleged NeoNazi”. This label is quite denigrating and you can’t just apply it to someone just because he doesn’t agree with your ideas on gender or race. ~2026-11654-05 (talk) 03:46, 21 February 2026 (UTC)

@Dotan il89 The problem is that Wikipedia end up accepting sources that don't provide any proof for what they're claiming.

It's interesting, though, how this article could have passed the Good Article nomination process—which requires "factually accurate and verifiable information"—when all the sourcing ultimately relies on the Anonymous Comrades Collective (the alleged researchers).

Their own "research" into the subject's private life, moreover, didn't produce substantial evidence for the accusation. At most, it amounts to identifying a Texas IT management employee who makes dark humor comics and engages in debates about anarcho-capitalism and classical liberalism. Beyond that, the A.C.C. article is written in an overly charged tone and is full of commentary on the cartoons. Pantarch (talk) 13:10, 15 February 2026 (UTC)