Talk:Charlie Kirk

Use of the word assassination

Given that his death was primarily labelled as an assassination by his supporters, should the neutral term murder/killing not be used? ~2026-47880-33 (talk) 19:44, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

The majority of sources use assassination; it would be less neutral for us to ignore that. — Czello ^(music) 19:56, 2 September 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, neutral sources also use this word. S8nder (talk) 17:39, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

CEO in infobox

Hi Tryptofish, I definitely agree that CEO of TPUSA should be somewhere in the infobox. I think the use of the ‘known for=‘ and/or ‘title=‘ parameters demonstrated in pages like Steve Jobs and Bill Gates would be better than moduling in the officeholder template. Any objection to me removing the officeholder module and noodling around with how we label the content here? Mikewem (talk) 00:31, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Fine with me, thanks. I just think the information is appropriate to keep in some form (). --Tryptofish (talk) 00:39, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Hi, as someone that's removed the officeholder template from both Charlie and Erika Kirk's articles, I think you should go for it. The entries 'organization' and 'title' are for exactly that, as you pointed out JoeyDirigo (talk) 23:42, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 8 September 2026

In the first sentence of the Aftermath subsection of Charlie Kirk#Assassination, Laura Loomer is mentioned by last name without a hypertext link to her page. This is the only mention of her in the article, and as such it is not immediately clear to the reader who "Loomer" is. In the article cited she is mentioned clearly as "influencer and unofficial Trump adviser Laura Loomer".

Replace Loomer with [[Laura Loomer|Loomer]] in `Far-right activists called for violence and retaliation in the aftermath of Kirk's assassination, with Loomer saying "The Left are terrorists."[267] and doxxed people they accused of celebrating or justifying Kirk's death.[268]` 1neStarSpider (talk) 10:22, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Done, although I used her full name rather than just "Loomer". Boredintheevening (talk) 12:04, 8 September 2026 (UTC)

Kirkification?

In the aftermath, it may be appropriate to have a section for, or even a link about the mass kirkification phenomenon. This would be especially applicable now we are past '1 Ak' (Anno Kirk.) It has become increasingly relevant to his legacy. Franb01ser (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Trivial nonsense meme that is not about him or his life. Slatersteven (talk) 16:20, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

just because you dont like a digital phenomenon doesnt mean its worthless, its pretty pervasive throughout the internet, it deserves some entry PraiseLordH (talk) 16:26, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I disagree as it was not all positive, and as such would have to take up far too much space. So my answer is that this will add nothing we need to know. I will now bow out for now. Slatersteven (talk) 16:31, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

why does it need to be positive?? the charlie kirk song which is used almost exclusively to mock him post mortem is mentioned. PraiseLordH (talk) 16:47, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Anybody want to present some WP:RS that suggest its worth including? – Muboshgu (talk) 17:11, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

I'm not in support or against adding a new section, but just wanted to note that currently there's a section about kirkification on the page for his assassination. Maybe this could be linked instead of adding an entirely new section. Streetr4 (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

RS (including one we use at the assassination article) report that Kirkification is something of a rick roll of the 20s. The connecting idea being that memers have endeavored to insert links in as many locations as possible in an effort to troll anyone who passes by them. Mikewem (talk) 17:56, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/09/10/infinite-online-afterlife-charlie-kirk/ ~2026-51677-69 (talk) 03:51, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Agree with @Slatersteven here, keep it off the page. Doesn't serve any sort of academic information. Will not pass WP:10YT. MaximusEditor (talk) 01:36, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Sounds fine provided reliable sources actually report on that. Cortador (talk) 13:43, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Support considering it’s an Internet phenomenon that’s been going strong for over a year now (hence the “Kirkiversary” stuff on Twitter yesterday), I personally don’t believe a single paragraph on his assassination page cuts it. That being said, you should obviously find reliable sources, but perhaps you could use the RS @Mikewem mentioned as a start. Good luck. KeysofDreams (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Support. This would be reasonable as it pertains to how his life and work endure in the public. ~2026-49590-79 (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

You could say it’s how we carry the flame 😜 KeysofDreams (talk) 03:26, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Support per above. "Kirkification" is a massive internet phenomenon among left-leaning and some right-leaning spaces as well. It's been covered majorly in reliable sources following Kirk's assassination. shane (talk to me if you want!) 15:17, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Support for all the reasons all the other supporters have provided. — tbc (talk) 01:04, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Support. I think it would be a disservice to readers to exclude the full spectrum of notable reactions to Kirk's death. Here are some relevant articles: NYT piece on the UC Berkeley "Kirkversary" event , Deseret News: "You didn't have to agree with Charlie Kirk to mourn his murder", National Review - Gen Z's Two-Sided Response to the Anniversary of Charlie Kirk's Death. The article as is presents a lack of due weight on the well-documented apparent celebrations of his assassination. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 16:52, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

It is an extremely widespread reaction, with a magnitude greater than the staute vandalsim Franb01ser (talk) 11:38, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

Agreed. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 13:48, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

"It is an extremely widespread reaction, with a magnitude greater than the staute vandalsim" - Is this something stated in WP:RS? Or is this conjecture? MaximusEditor (talk) 18:50, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

There are some okayish articles, but they are behind paywalls, or abit flimsy. The statue is widely documented, but kirkification should get a look in, considering the scale. There are some sources. Franb01ser (talk) 11:55, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

We have a whole article on Kirks death, where such reactions can go. Slatersteven (talk) 12:03, 20 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree. Would you also support the shortening of the current reactions to assassination section in the article? It is too long, and as it stands doesn't paint an accurate picture of the full breadth of reactions. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 13:51, 22 September 2026 (UTC)

Agree with SlaterSteven above, also we could shorten the "reaction to assassination" section perhaps to summarize it as best as we can, otherwise yes seems to be quite long especially considering it is covered on the aforementioned article of Kirk's death. MaximusEditor (talk) 18:53, 23 September 2026 (UTC)

Support. As has been mentioned, there are relevant sources available and a standalone Wikipedia page about the phenomenon already. The fact that such an article exists does not mean it shouldn't be mentioned on this page; a separate article for his assassination exists, yet the event is mentioned here. I think that a short, single-paragraph (three or four sentences at most) summary of the phenomenon and a "Main article" hyperlink is warranted. DougtheDonkey (talk) 08:33, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

More statues

The one in time square wasin't the only statue unveiled yesterday. Two more were, one in Arizona and the other in Utah, can this be added to the legacy section?

Statue of Charlie Kirk unveiled on stage at Utah Valley University memorial event

Turning Point USA unveils Charlie Kirk statue outside Phoenix headquarters | FOX 10 Phoenix Godfrey Balderdash (talk) 20:52, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

They both seem temporary structures. Slatersteven (talk) 09:06, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

That statue of Kirk at the TPUSA headquarters in Phoenix was defaced, seems to gotten a bit of coverage, I'm thinking we add that into the article along with the Time Square statue in the legacy section? Godfrey Balderdash + Slatersteven thoughts? MaximusEditor (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I agree, I would say that alongside freedom two other statues were unveiled at the first-year anniversary of his death and one at the TPUSA headquarters was quickly vandalized. I can't edit it but that would be my recommendation Godfrey Balderdash (talk) 18:53, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Edit request 11 September 2026

Add this to the article:

Put it in between the C-SPAN link and the navboxes in the External links section.

~2026-49171-81 (talk) 23:51, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

seems unnecessary. Rainsage (talk) 18:52, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Edit request 13 September 2026

At the last paragraph of the lede, change "On September 10, 2025, Kirk was fatally shot by a rooftop sniper" to "On September 10, 2025, Kirk was fatally shot by a rooftop sniper". Poppytarts (talk) 12:19, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

 Not done The assassination article is linked in the first paragraph of the lead. See MOS:LINKONCE: "Link a term at most once per major section, at first occurrence." — Chrisahn (talk) 12:28, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Should we change this to permanent ECP?

Wouldnt be a bad idea to change the temp ECP to a perm ECP due to Vandalism even from users with SP perms (.) 18:05, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

I am not seeing a lot of Vandalism. Slatersteven (talk) 18:23, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

The way it works is we wait til Oct 27 when it defaults back to perm acp. If vandalism returns at that time, then we request ecp to be reinstated. Mikewem (talk) 18:42, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

@Mikewem alrighty. (.) 19:42, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Why right-wing

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Why label Kirk "right-wing?" Seems to me, he was first and foremost an American political activist, radio host, author, and evangelical Christian who co-founded Turning Point USA in 2012 with his close friend and business mentor Bill Montgomery. I object to the bias of the lead sentence, but I wish to discuss before attempting to improve the article. I'm not going to get into an edit war. I don't have the time to deal with twees, only reasonable Wikipedians need reply. — tbc (talk) 01:02, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

RS call him right-wing, nor do any of the things you list preclude him from being right-wing. And what the hell are twees? Slatersteven (talk) 08:11, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

I second this question, what are twees? shane (talk to me if you want!) 16:43, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

I, too, would like to know what in the world a twee is. DougtheDonkey (talk) 08:39, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

I won't pretend that I know, but I'm guessing that it isn't the thing with woots, a twunk, bwanches, and leaves. --Tryptofish (talk) 16:35, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

You mean a hefalump hiding in a tree? Slatersteven (talk) 16:39, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Having made a dumb joke, I'll say seriously that twee is actually a word (adjective) in the English language, meaning excessively cutesy, in a cringe sort of way. I've never heard it used as a noun, though. In context, I'm guessing that the OP meant it to mean something like "effete snobs". --Tryptofish (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

“Effete (liberal-coded) snobs” is what I assumed and is probably most likely given the context. Though, the context does allow for the less-likely possibility that it’s a typo for tweens. Mikewem (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Or tweets (as in responses), or twits, or maybe something ruder. Slatersteven (talk) 18:04, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

Reliable sources do in fact call him right-wing and/or conservative. I think most reasonable people would agree with this assessment, given his career was focused on promoting the Republican party and conservative/right-wing causes. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Reliable sources call him right-wing. shane (talk to me if you want!) 16:45, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

They also call him far-right. 10:18, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.