Talk:Soyjak.party: Difference between revisions – Wikipedia

By /

Line 96: Line 96:

:::::do you have a source for that, and a reason why the ADL would be unreliable here? [[User:MetalBreaksAndBends|MetalBreaksAndBends]] ([[User talk:MetalBreaksAndBends|talk]]) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

:::::do you have a source for that, and a reason why the ADL would be unreliable here? [[User:MetalBreaksAndBends|MetalBreaksAndBends]] ([[User talk:MetalBreaksAndBends|talk]]) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

:::::We can read [https://soybooru.com/post/view/97790 Soyjak comments] for ourselves.   –[[User:Skywatcher68|Skywatcher68]] ([[User talk:Skywatcher68|talk]]) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

:::::We can read [https://soybooru.com/post/view/97790 Soyjak comments] for ourselves.   –[[User:Skywatcher68|Skywatcher68]] ([[User talk:Skywatcher68|talk]]) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

::::::”We were the ones who pushed him closer and closer to this edge day by day”   –[[User:Skywatcher68|Skywatcher68]] ([[User talk:Skywatcher68|talk]]) 19:13, 11 December 2025 (UTC)

Users of the site have a history of raiding Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia. It seems likely this article will also be subject to vandalism. While WP:NO-PREEMPT says articles can’t be protected pre-emptively, I think this measure will soon show itself necessary. A comment by a user of the site was already posted on this talk page. ~2025-37440-32 (talk) 09:56, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the history, there was already a non-constructive edit by a user of the site (based on the lingo) ~2025-37440-32 (talk) 10:00, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the fuggen sherdee is best known for edits that are widely regarded by peer-reviewed studies, the experts, and Snopes to be coally and unwholesome 100 though LeastKnownForSoy (talk) 13:41, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The science supports this assertion, outstanding work kind stranger, have my reddit gold! Sneedjaker (talk) 10:22, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
if their attempts to vandalize wikipedia pages such as Jartypory, Lesotho and Shartym wasn’t enough, we might have to do so before we claim that “Jimbo” was “the coal that killed the sharpie” or somethin.
AND the talk page is filled with soyteens, fun fact: the site is used by 16-year olds as stated in the site, and their moderators are transgender. whether they are self-aware or are playng along to preserve the site in a way is unclear Charles0304 (talk) 21:05, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
>and their moderators are transgender
meds Soynorth (talk) 21:22, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Charles is a proud Lesothian BTW ~2025-39997-32 (talk) 01:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All of the information I added is true, but where am I supposed to find references if Soyjak Wiki is blacklisted? Most articles documenting Soyjak.party are about the 4chan hack. Soynorth (talk) 15:41, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, I can’t link to the site itself due to it being blacklisted. Soynorth (talk) 17:37, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Last thing: can you add information without citations as long as you put Citation needed? I have a lot to write about the site culture but I can’t add it in. Soynorth (talk) 17:52, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, you cannot.
Hope that helps. Augmented Seventh (talk) 20:44, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So where do I get my sources from? There aren’t many websites documenting the culture of the site online. Soynorth (talk) 20:46, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can only include information sourced from reliable, secondary sources. If those don’t exist for a given piece of information, then the information probably doesn’t belong here. Which is OK — not everything about a given subject needs to be in its article. I’m assuming that “Soyjack Wiki” is user-generated, which means it wouldn’t be an acceptable source regardless. —tony 20:48, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There’s an article from the site “Hacker News” about the 4chan hack but it doesn’t go into much detail. ~2025-39010-44 (talk) 22:44, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
HN is a forum. ~2025-39028-65 (talk) 19:07, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The logo has a transgender individual being hanged, and that can trigger people try censoring it. ~2025-38957-09 (talk) 08:23, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’d rather not censor Wikipedia. Soynorth (talk) 10:44, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
this, so much this Itzcrazycremeens (talk) 11:12, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CENSOR still applies here regardless. ~2025-39028-65 (talk) 19:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
>The logo has a transgender individual being hanged, and that can trig-ACK! ~2025-40048-81 (talk) 17:44, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
please elaborate on what this means MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 17:55, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think “soyjak.party” is supposed to be in all lowercase, the Soyjak Wiki and the actual website show it in lowercase. ItsReallyAlex (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Soynorth (talk) 18:54, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Everything about the owners such as Soot, Kuz, Froot and Quote must be written since they are vital to the sites history.

Though they are properly archived by the website and the Soyjak community, we can’t use SoyjakWiki as a source since it may be unreliable similar to Encyclopedia Dramática since they aren’t neutral, however they have important information there.

Stuff like jakparty.soy is a minor mention. ~2025-39475-58 (talk) 20:20, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This will probably be really hard because there is almost 0 reliable sources on the history of this site outside of the Soyjak Wiki. ItsReallyAlex (talk) 21:17, 8 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you’re going to add stuff to this page, please add reliable sources. No, your site nor your mediawiki instance are reliable. I don’t have a vendetta against your site, but I encourage to be at least constructive when editing. Don’t be like User:Formerlychucks, who got banned for harassment in a similar vein. ~2025-39420-46 (talk) 02:50, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

>No, your site nor your mediawiki instance are reliable.
then what DO we use? apart from a handful of articles about antioch that hardly touch on the sharty’s history (if at all) we have no credible sources ~2025-39629-30 (talk) 11:17, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gotta wait until someone publishes more reliable info o algo. We don’t want to fill the article with unsourced coal and get it ‘nished. ~2025-39631-36 (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You use sources, @~2025-39629-30, which pass WP:42 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:36, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can there be anything more reddit than that. Le sigh. Anyways to answer the question, it just has to be made in a website that probably has a good reputation of getting it right most of the time, ergo a “reliable” source; as in, one you can rely on to build an encyclopedia. There really isn’t a high bar here for sources, because it’s a website. The only problem is that it’s cultural significance is dubious and in a grey area and so nobody has published anything about it in any kind of scholarly journal (see 4chan#References for an example of a website with cultural significance and scholarly works that have been undertaken that sought to uncover this) to analyse the sociocultural trends of users (in other words, it’s SNCA), otherwise we wouldn’t be here making assessments of the article in it’s current shape. Would also like to add, that the article is sourcemining (datamining geg) from the listed sources because most of the claims being added here by the minute aren’t being looked for beforehand to be verifiable, they’re just added to an already pre-existing source; which is bad practice but this article probably doesn’t stand a chance anyways, it should be converted back into a redirect. ~2025-39704-27 (talk) 08:45, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SNCA words words words ~2025-40048-81 (talk) 17:55, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:52, 10 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In the lede section, there are already 2 images in the infobox and a stray image that depicts the Soyjak Wiki, which is also rather confusing as it’s not mentioned anywhere in the article. Most articles about websites generally only include one logo/image and from what I can tell there is only one logo that is used which is the first one. See Kiwi Farms or 4chan for an example. ~2025-39704-27 (talk) 11:40, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the only logo for the whole soyspehere (the collection of websites that are affiliated to the main imageboard) is the current one being shown in the infobox, the SoyjakWiki image should be removed or moved to the corresponding subarticle. ~2025-40171-28 (talk) 19:11, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Victory shall be mine: you are edit warring by deleting the information about the shooting. Can you please discuss why you think that information shouldn’t be in the article instead of removing it? It seems like others want it to stay. Gommeh 📖   🎮 18:31, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

because the shooter didn’t use the site and used twitter Victory shall be mine (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this user is socking, please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Suck my taint girl fan FantasticWikiUser (talk) 18:34, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have proof of that though, VSBM? Gommeh 📖   🎮 18:36, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please source and cite your additions properly.
Thank you, Augmented Seventh (talk) 18:37, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They were removing content, not adding it. Decent chance they’re a sockpuppet who hasn’t gotten the message from the last time they were blocked. Gommeh 📖   🎮 18:39, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OR maybe just removing plain misinformation being spread from known neo nazi,CSAM spreader groups which are 764,09A and UTTP which they have a huge gripe agaisnt soyjak.party, the site wasnt involved in any sort of real life crimes and the only known drama was about the former owner “Kuz”(Carter) and that’s about the jist of it. ~2025-40171-28 (talk) 19:08, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
do you have a source for that, and a reason why the ADL would be unreliable here? MetalBreaksAndBends (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can read Soyjak comments for ourselves.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
“We were the ones who pushed him closer and closer to this edge day by day”   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Exit mobile version