Talk:Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting#See also and cats

Re [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting&oldid=prev&diff=1293169562 this edit]: It is giving undue weight to something that has only a minor relevance to the shooting. It is not totally irrelevant, but nor is it something that a person would miss out on if it was not mentioned. The amount of text being given to this is excessive. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:39, 31 May 2025 (UTC)

Request for including of Jesse John Lewis Lovelynoodle (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:Wikipedia article content is based on published reliable sources. Provide some, and we will have something to discuss. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

This is similar to the sporting event mentioned above. To stay on topic, the article should not include loosely related things that happened years after the shooting.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:Agreed. WP:NOTMEMORIAL is policy. AndyTheGrump (talk) 18:47, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

It seem a big reason for the art he's releasing is clearing up some misconceptions about the Sandy Hook Massacre. In a way, these vicious rumours contributed to this person's mental decline and lose of custody. You can't claim that the crisis actor myth wasn't in some way perpetuated by the fact Jesse Lewis exists and his daughter/little brothers were similar ages to the victims. These are more victims of the shooter, the daughter who lost her father at seven. This is an important factor of the shooting. They are well-known in the local communities. His picture is on the other three years of the yearbooks, other than the one that's commonly published.

I have a copy of his linktree, but it won't let me post it. Lovelynoodle (talk) 19:36, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:That would be original research. We have to go with what reliable sources say. Masem (t) 19:43, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

:Lovelynoodle, you seem to misunderstand how Wikipedia works, and what the purpose of Wikipedia is. We don't base articles on social media, and we don't include content to 'clear up misconceptions'. If published reliable sources write about such things, we may consider including what they have to say, but they have to write about it first. AndyTheGrump (talk) 21:56, 1 June 2025 (UTC)

I recognize that the last consensus on this talk page and Draft:Adam Lanza decided that not enough reliable sources covered Adam Lanza's YouTube channel, CulturalPhilistine, as stated in Q10 of this talk page's FAQs.

However, I believe that I have found enough information and reliable sources to resolve this problem and establish the notability of the YouTube channel, as stated and cited in Draft:Efilism#2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting and Draft: Adam Lanza#YouTube channel and philosophy.

The citations to T. K. Van Allen's 2024 book, which describes and analyzes Lanza's philosophy, as described on his YouTube channel, can be verified by reading the kindle free sample of Van Allen's book.

Do other editors agree that these sources are sufficient for mentioning the CulturalPhilistine YouTube channel and Eulavism philosophy in this article? Zero Contradictions (talk) 01:10, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

• Agree - Given that a significant amount of reliable news sources have reported on Adam Lanzas channel after the IVF attack, I don’t see a problem with it. Indiana6724 (talk) 02:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:It's too speculative and does not appear in the final report. Various sources have claimed all sorts of things about Lanza's online activities but there is no firm proof. There is a problem with stating as a fact things that do not come from the official investigation. The claim that Lanza had a YouTube channel started life on Reddit a few years back and was picked up by journalists. Even if the sources may be reliable, it remains unknown whether the voice in the recordings actually is Lanza. There is an understandable need for some people to fill in the gaps with the motive, but it is important not to fact wash things that come from Reddit by saying that a journalist reported them. A lot of the sources for this are not blue chip, and there is also a problem with undue weight with giving this as the motive simply because some journalists mentioned it briefly in the context of the 2025 Palm Springs fertility clinic bombing. See [https://www.reddit.com/r/NoStupidQuestions/comments/1ccazex/how_did_people_find_adam_lanzaa_youtube_channel/ this source] which explains how all of this came about. Quote: "it seems that individual redditors stumbled across it and compiled some convincing evidence that the account belonged to Lanza... But how would anyone let alone someone with a lot of knowledge of who AL is and what his voice sounds like (a type of person that makes up a very small percentage of the internet) just "stumble" across a channel long abandoned with only hundreds of views? It seems rather unlikely." WP:RSREDDIT is nowhere near a reliable source for a Wikipedia article, as no-one has explained exactly how these audio recordings were found, or why they are Lanza's voice.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:48, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::When you said that "started life on Reddit a few years back and was picked up by journalists", what journalists are you referring to? If you're referring to journalists who have made that claim before 2025, then I don't know who or what you're talking about, unless you're referring to Katharine Dee, who [https://unherd.com/2023/04/we-need-to-talk-about-extreme-antinatalism/?us reported in 2023]: "Adam Lanza, the Sandy Hook shooter, was inspired by efilism." As far as I know, the journalists who have reported on this since May 2025 (besides Katharine Dee) are the only journalists to have made any such claim from a reliable source(s).

::To the contrary, we do know that the voice in the recordings is from Adam Lanza. Anyone could listen to the recordings for themself and verify that it's the same voice that appeared in [https://archive.org/details/travis-the-chimp the phone call to AnarchyRadio on 2011 December 11] about Travis (chimpanzee), a phone call which Lanza personally referenced on a forum under his "Smiggles" alias: "I wish that I hadn't spoken nonstop about Travis for so long, but I didn't want to seem crazy by randomly bringing up a chimpanzee for unknown reasons" [https://www.upi.com/blog/2014/01/16/Adam-Lanza-made-chilling-call-to-radio-station-year-before-Sandy-Hook-shooting/9341389917032/]

::I'm not trying to be rude, but your claim that "it is important not to fact wash things that come from Reddit" seems presumptuous. How do you know that the journalists got that claim from reddit? Do you have a reliable source to prove that, or did you ask them personally? One of the news articles that I cited featured two direct quotes from the archives of the videos from the CulturalPhilistine YouTube channel. I highly doubt that that journalist simply pulled those quotes from Reddit, especially since that news article was published in a reliable source, as you said.

::When you said "giving this as the motive", I once again don't understand what you're talking about. None of the text that I added or the sources that I cited made any definitive claims about what Lanza's motives were. At most, the 2024 philosophy book by T. K. Van Allen that I cited suggested that Lanza's eulavism philosophy influenced his decisions. Van Allen also mentioned how his mother was planning to evict Lanza from his bedroom to sell the house (for which I cited a source from a government agency in Connecticut). But Van Allen never claimed to know what Lanza's motives for mass murder were, nor did I add any text to the article implying that. In fact, Van Allen explicitly wrote: "Eulavism might lead to suicide, if a paradox can lead anywhere, but it doesn’t imply murder." I cited that information in the text that I added to the article.

::As for undue weight, my text didn't merely cite journalists who mentioned the YouTube channel in the context of the 2025 Palm Springs fertility clinic bombing. Aside from those news articles from 2025, I also cited a 2023 magazine and a 2024 philosophy book. So, I cited three different types of sources from three different years, and I judge the book to be the most reliable out of all of these.

::With all of that said, I think that the only good reason that you mentioned to not mention the YouTube channel or Eulavism in the article is that neither of them are mentioned in the official investigation or the final report. So, if that's a sufficient reason to not mention anything related to the YouTube channel, the investigation has been closed since 2013, and no official government agencies are going to update their reports, then I can only conclude that the YouTube channel and philosophy will never be mentioned in this article, and that will just have to be a fact that we must all live with. Zero Contradictions (talk) 07:02, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::Apparently, you edited your comment before I sent my response, so I shall make another edit to address the text added in your edits. I don't believe that the quote that you copied from reddit does anything to bolster your reasons for not mentioning the YouTube channel in the article. There are plenty of people who have been deeply interested in or even obsessed with Adam Lanza and finding everything there is to know about his life and online internet activity. If the channel only got a few hundred views as you wrote, then of course it makes sense that it took so long for people to find it and connect it with Lanza, especially since Lanza never referenced the channel or its videos in any of his other known online activity.

::I have never cited reddit as a reliable source in any wikipedia article, so WP:RSREDDIT does not apply to any of the text that I added. As you said previously, all the text that I cited was backed up by WP:reliable sources. I explained the main reason why we know that the Lanza's voice is the one that narrated the videos in my previous edit to this talk page. Once again, the only good argument to not mention the YouTube channel in the article is that it was never mentioned in the official investigation or the final report. Zero Contradictions (talk) 07:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:::This first appeared on Reddit around three years ago. It seems that various journalists then found it and mentioned it without any further fact checking. I'm worried about the lack of blue chip sourcing for this, because it risks giving the impression that Lanza really did do this when it is speculative. As critics have pointed out, there is no mention of this before around 2022, and only circumstantial evidence that it is Lanza's voice.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:22, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::::Unless you referring to the official investigation report or other reports made by relevant government agencies, I don't know what you mean by "blue chip sourcing". I've searched, but that doesn't seem to be an official Wikipedia term. Zero Contradictions (talk) 07:28, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:One of the first mentions is [https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/uvdz57/8_months_ago_the_sandy_hook_shooter_adam_lanzas/ here]. By blue chip sourcing I mean major news sources such as CNN etc. This is why there is a problem with WP:DUE. Anyone can write about anything on the internet, but quantity is not always the same as quality. While I don't dispute that this may have been Lanza's voice, the original source of all of this is armchair sleuthing on Reddit, which is something that some of the journalists writing about it haven't made clear.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:39, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::Thanks for explaining the meaning of "blue chip sourcing". As I said before, I judge the book that I cited to be a far more reliable source than any of the news articles that I cited. I don't think you read it (most people haven't), but I doubt that anybody could write a more thoughtful, intelligent, or better written analysis about Adam Lanza than what T. K. Van Allen has written. I'm not interested in debating this any further, as I accept that more verification may be needed regarding this issue. Zero Contradictions (talk) 08:08, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::One last thing that I forgot to mention. For what it's worth, [https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2014/01/16/lead-intv-saltz-adam-lanza-mental-state.cnn CNN] and [https://www.huffpost.com/entry/adam-lanza-phone-call-radio_n_4609510 HuffPost] have mentioned and verified Adam Lanza's call with AnarchyRadio, in addition to the source cited in Draft:Adam Lanza#Reported 2011 phone call. The phone call is not mentioned in this article, and I don't know why, even though CNN is considered to be a blue-chip source. If CNN believes that Adam Lanza was the one speaking on that phone call, it should be pretty easy to compare the voice in the YouTube channel with the voice in the phone call and personally judge that both voices are from the same person, even if neither can be mentioned in the article. Zero Contradictions (talk) 08:31, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:::If you type "Adam Lanza YouTube channel" into a search engine, it soon becomes clear that the earliest mentions and discussions of this are on Reddit around 2022. It is rather odd that nobody had found the YouTube channel until around ten years after the shooting, so some caution is needed. This has been discussed before, and is in the talk page archive here and here, and the consensus at the time was not to include it, because the source was Reddit.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:40, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

::::You already said that. None of your replies explain why the phone call with AnarchyRadio is not mentioned in the article. Again, the radio call has been confirmed by CNN. Zero Contradictions (talk) 17:25, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:::::This was discussed previously here. CNN didn't confirm that the voice actually was Lanza, saying that he may have done this [https://edition.cnn.com/2014/01/16/us/newtown-shooter-possible-radio-interview/index.html], because the original source was the New York Daily News and they were basing the story on two friends of Lanza saying that it sounded like his voice. The head of the official investigation, Stephen Sedensky, also declined to confirm that it was Lanza's voice.[https://web.archive.org/web/20250221083016/https://www.nydailynews.com/2014/01/16/adam-lanza-calls-in-radio-station-a-year-before-sandy-hook-shooting-and-gives-bizarre-interview-listen-to-the-tape/] There is enough circumstantial evidence that it may be Lanza's voice in the recording, but the evidence stops short of being conclusive. Even the original New York Daily News article doesn't quite confirm that it was Lanza, but does provide good evidence that it may have been him.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:09, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Re [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting&diff=prev&oldid=1293922858 this edit]: This has become one of the most famous images of Lanza, but it is not the original version. It was one of the first images of Lanza that the media found of him in December 2012, but the original is in black and white.[https://web.archive.org/web/20130131031926/https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/15/nyregion/adam-lanza-an-enigma-who-is-now-identified-as-a-mass-killer.html] Some news sources then decided that it would look better in color, and produced a heavily edited version of it. Note the inaccurate use of pink lipstick.[https://imgur.com/a/U5fZNim] The eyes also have a more disturbing hypnotic stare in the edited version. Even if this image was free to use (and it probably isn't) the fact that it is heavily photoshopped and not the original image would rule it out as a suitable. ♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

:Agree entirely with the above. We can't use a badly-colourised/photoshopped image in this sort of context (or any other that I can think of). AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:45, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting|answered=yes}}

Change

“In February, 2025, Judge Chirstopher Lopez also denied a new auction for the site.[223] “

to

“In February, 2025, Judge Christopher Lopez also denied a new auction for the site.[223]” 2600:1014:B0B6:7109:DDD9:FD3B:5FB6:2DD3 (talk) 23:24, 23 June 2025 (UTC)

:{{done}} Done. Thanks for pointing out the typo. Meters (talk) 23:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)