Talk:Sinfest

Sinfest Murder

Travis Ikeguchi, the suspected murderer of a GLBTQ positive businesswoman in Lake Arrowhead was a Sinfest fan: https://i.imgur.com/sEOxqNu.png https://abcnews.go.com/US/california-store-owner-shot-dead-dispute-displaying-pride/story?id=102408818 Is there any way to put this information into the article? 22:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:C883:5430:31DD:509D:60CE:3D09 (talk)

I'm afraid a related tweet is not enough for us to mention it on Wikipedia, per WP:OR. If an independent source mentions it, then yes, for sure. (Also wow that strip... :( ) ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 16:17, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, the strip is awful. I'm a bit too busy to nominate it for deletion, but there seem to be some rumblings on this page which could lead to its AfD nomination. Historyday01 (talk) 19:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It isn't farfetched to hypothesize that transphobic media can encourage violence, though.

There are real human lives at stake, but you want to wait until there are enough victims for an independent source to finally feel like covering the story? Molotovius Arsoniuis (talk) 20:00, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

We're an encyclopedia, we don't speculate. Yes, we do need to wait for independent sources. — Czello ^(music) 20:04, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

Not notable. Ishida didn't commit the murder. 46.155.12.43 (talk) 15:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

The comic for 1/28/24 is.... really bad. Like, really really anti semitic. Can we PLEASE JUST TAKE THIS FUCKING ARTICLE DOWN.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:447:c883:5430:5462:6a7e:ab97:fe48 (talk) 03:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I hadn't checked in on Sinfest in about a decade, and it's been running straight anti-semitic strips for months (as of Feb 2025). Pure jaw-dropping toxic shit. But I'd rather have that described in the article than have it deleted. (Edited to add:) aaaand I see this is discussed below. I came here wondering what the f— happened to this comic, and now I know why Wikipedia can't tell me, which is a shame. I think I understand the positions taken below, and I apologize that I have nothing further to contribute.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.4.210.85 (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding. Several editors have tried to find sources we can use in the WP-environment, not without some success, but not on the Jew-stuff either. I think people will keep looking, and if you find something, please come back and say so! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:33, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

As of 2026, he's straight-up lauding Hitler ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 14:23, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Categories

@EdgierEdgar @Le Blue Dude please see WP:CATDEF. Categories are supposed to be defining traits that are commonly applied in reliable sources to the subject of an article. A one-off mention is not enough and does not aid navigation. Someone looking at those categories is not going to be interested in this article and it sticks out like a sore thumb compared to the other articles in the categories. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Hard disagree. We have a source, and the category is fully accurate. That’s all that seems needed. Le Blue Dude (talk) 20:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

No that isn't what is needed. Please read the policy page I linked. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

QANON does seem to be a defining feature of sinfest, what’s the problem?

These comics are clearly written to tap into the Qanon market, and ryan broderick is a good source saying there’s QAnon in sinfest.Le Blue Dude (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

If you have only one source that states something it quite clearly isn't a defining trait. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

It’s an article with a dearth of sources, Traum. If we need multiple articles for everything, we would just delete the whole thing because all we’d be able to write is ‘Sinfest of us a comic by Tatsyuda Ishida. Some people think it’s funny. Others think it’s offensive. We do not have the sources to say anything else about it.” Le Blue Dude (talk) 20:43, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

You're still missing the point of categorisation. It is to aid navigation for readers, people looking for Christian fascism aren't going to want an article with a tenuous connection. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

So, what similar category would you recommend instead? Is there a fascist literature category? Le Blue Dude (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't believe there is a useful navigational aid relating to it. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:36, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Then I guess we’re keeping this one. It seems functional enough to me. Le Blue Dude (talk) 22:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Traumanovaville's personal point of view that they are continuing to try to push is not supported by reliable sources, consensus, or the editing guideline they have apparently misread and linked to. The accuracy and neutrality of this article has been substantially improved by multiple editors over the past week or so. The categories of the article should also accurately reflect these improvements. For example, I will add "Category:Ethnic humour" to this as multiple reliable sources describe the defining characteristics of this comic strip to include that it is "racially insensitive at best," uses "racial caricatures," etc. There are likely other additional categories that should still be added. Thank you to everyone who is helping to improve the accuracy and neutrality of this article. It is now becoming much more like an encyclopedia article and much less like a fan club page. EdgierEdgar (talk) 21:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Please don't add categories to prove a point and read through WP:CAT to see what the actual purpose of categories are. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:24, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Based on the guideline Traumnovelle linked, I believe that excluding the recently added categories would be the correct decision. Right now, there is a single self-published source associating Sinfest with Qanon; that's not nearly enough for something so controversial. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 22:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
• We have multiple RS over multiple years talking about Sinfest's feminist and sex-related content. We have no indication for how much QAnon content there was; nor how much Christian fascism, noting that:

• these are sourced from a single SPS and (currently and correctly) attributed to him rather than being in WP:WIKIVOICE, which cats definitely are;
• anti-Jewish world-views are not limited to Christianity, right-wing or otherwise;
• Broderick identified Ishida's use of the Bilderberg Group and the Illuminati -- how much? don't know -- half a decade before QAnon was a thing;
• the current storyline does not appear to be Christian nor fascist;
• we don't have an explicit indication of the characteristics ("random internet nonsense") of the work that Broderick was identifying as his "Christian fascist slurry" of 2022.

Looking at Category:QAnon and Category:Christian fascism, clearly Sinfest does not belong even were we to have multiple RS secondary sources saying much the same thing as Broderick (cf WP:NONDEF). We don't even have the cites currently to support a broader categorisation such as a subcat of Category:Conspiracy theories. Again: Cats are not that important - they're maybe sixth in usefulness as a method for readers to locate articles of interest. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 00:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

The current storyline is now about how great Tatsuya Ishida seems to think Hitler was, very literally. ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 14:31, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

EdgierEdgar we clearly reached a consensus here not to include categories based on a single source. This category is no different. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:57, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

This editor's complaint had been to falsely claim that an anti-trans category was "Unsourced." I have pointed out to them that this is in fact already sourced in the article, including where the article describes "anti-trans storylines," citing a source which describes the comic strip as "outlandishly transphobic," describes the comic creator as a "transphobic fascist," and more. I take it that this editor must now understand that they were wrong when they falsely claimed this was "unsourced," because their new complaint is to now falsely claim above that there is only "a single source" that describes these anti-trans views. I'll point out that the article also already also contains other sources describing such things as "discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation." So, no, that this comic creator is publishing anti-trans views is not "unsourced" nor is it "based on a single source." I will say that it is a somewhat good sign that this editor is starting to ask for help on the talk page so that they can better understand reliable sources, consensus, and editing standards rather than just repeatedly trying to edit war with multiple editors. Thank you to everyone who is helping to improve the accuracy and neutrality of this article, so that it may approach the standards of an encyclopedia article rather than a personal fan page. EdgierEdgar (talk) 16:28, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

You can blow off with the condensing tone. You've been explained what the purpose of categories are and what WP:CATDEF is but you'll continue to disruptively POV-push Traumnovelle (talk) 19:00, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

• I'm not sure why this category would be appropriate when the previous ones at issue were not; CATDEF again seems like the relevant guideline. Additionally, categorizing someone as an "activist" merely for creating a comic seems like a stretch, even if their work does include political themes. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 19:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

  Previous category complaints were "unsourced" or "a single source," neither of which apply here. If "activist" seems inaccurate when describing a comic creator whom our reliable sources describe as a "transphobic fascist" who engages in "discrimination based on gender identity" and creates "outlandishly transphobic" comics, then perhaps Category:Transphobia in literature would be an improvement. EdgierEdgar (talk) 19:53, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

  There is only one source that applies the label, therefore it is not defining and not helpful for navigation. Please learn what categories are actually used for; they are not boxes to be ticked. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

  To hopefully put the complaints to rest from the editor who believes it is "unsourced" or relies on a "single source" to describe this comic strip as "anti-transgender" or "transphobia," I will list what some of the sources currently used in this article say on the topic. 1) Broderick, Ryan (April 29, 2022). "The Long, Strange Journey Of Sinfest" describes "outlandishly transphobic" comics and a "transphobic fascist" comic creator. 2) Tatsuya, Ishida (September 21, 2022). "Twitter Lockout" describes "hateful conduct" as the reaction to a comic strip depicting a "woman-man" who "punches TERFs." 3) Ishida, Tatsuya (December 7, 2022). "Patreon removed my account for promoting 'sentiments of discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation.'" 4) Kleefeld, Sean (April 8, 2024). "On Tatsuya Ishida" has descriptions of the comic as "open discrimination against LGBTQ+ people" and the artist as a "TERF." So, that is four sources currently in use in the article, and I believe every single source in the article since 2020 that consistently describes these comics and their creator as "transphobic," "TERF," etc. EdgierEdgar (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

  Ishida's own sources do not count. The Kleefeld part is a quote, which makes not defining in that the source has not referred to the subject as such. The purpose of categories is navigation, people looking at the category do not want to find this one word mention that isn't very obvious: they want subjects who are notable for their anti-transgender activism and have sections detailing it. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2025 (UTC)

Example of the first comic strip as suggested

Gråbergs Gråa Sång made a comment about possibly adding "the first strip of the comic," and Hydronium~Hydroxide made a comment saying it "would actually be usefully representative" to show a Daily Bruin example along with others. So, by their suggestion I've found that first Daily Bruin strip here at https://archive.org/details/ucladailybruin137losa/page/n469/mode/2up and it has a panel showing what is described in the text as "a full spread artists's rendition of an opened vagina." That does seem to be representative of those defining traits that the Publisher's Weekly calls "raunchier and harsher" than the early 2000s comic strips. That is, even "harsher" than the early 2000s "racial stereotypes" Kleefeld describes and the "lots of sexism ... in a bikini, showing her ass to the reader" that Garrity describes. So, there is that example of the first comic strip as suggested. EdgierEdgar (talk) 22:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Bless archive.org. Are you suggesting it as WP:LEADIMAGE? At the time I was thinking of the first web-strip, but this of course per-dates that. I see the link has several Sinfest strips, which makes sense since it seems to be over a month's worth of issues. This makes me wonder if there is a Daily Bruin with an article or interview on Ishida. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:25, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

I am not sure about your suggestion about adding this as a lead image, but I have added a quote from this first comic strip as a text description. This is consistent with multiple editors, including Gråbergs Gråa Sång's comment about representing "the first strip of the comic," and Hydronium~Hydroxide saying it "would actually be usefully representative" to include a Daily Bruin example. And as I said previously, this is representative of those defining traits that Publisher's Weekly calls "raunchier and harsher" than the early 2000s comic strips. An editor unfamaliar with Wikipedia's standards has attempted to remove this as "WP:OR", however "On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists." This quote is cited and published in the reliable source newspaper The Daily Bruin, so this is clearly not original research by any stretch. I will restore this addition and encourage all editors to familiarize themselves with Wikipedia's content policies and standards. EdgierEdgar (talk) 19:12, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Antisemitism

In 2024 and especially in 2025 the comic has been entirely focused on deeply antisemitic themes. It's nearly exclusively use to attack Jews and Israel, often leveraging the worst blood libels and historical tropes and conspiracy theories of recent decades. The "Later changes in direction and themes" section needs to be updated to indicate that's it's basically entirely an antisemitic project at this point that directs nothing but poisonous hate into the world. The author's views are clearly bigoted and despicable, even beyond what's already covered in the main article. Datavortex (talk) 16:58, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

This has been discussed ad nauseam already, you need a reliable source to support that claim before it can be added to the article. Also you need to add your section to the bottom rather than the top. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:11, 6 November 2025 (UTC)

Have you read the current storyline? It's called "Reimagining Villians" and literally lauds Hitler. ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 14:32, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

That's not the point. We can't say this ourselves without sources that say it first. — Czello ^(music) 16:04, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

Hitler is literally depicted in the comic in a positive light. What would count as a sufficient source? ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 21:13, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

An independent and reliable source describing it as antisemitic. — Czello ^(music) 21:54, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

WP:RS would almost certainly be needed, however if some something of Ishida's could be found outside the comic (including twitter or newsletter) in which he states something about Sinfest's current/recent foci, his artistic intent, etc, it could be succinctly and accurately quoted (WP:ABOUTSELF) to allow the article to better reflect current reality, but would probably still not be enough to use the term/category "antisemitism" (WP:NOR). ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 03:21, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

So racist depictions of Jewish people literally poisoning wells leading to the death of children is insufficient for us to determine if he's antisemitic, to clarify? ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 23:10, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

Yes, WP:NOR applies. As Wikipedia editors we of course have eyes and opinions, but articles need to reflect what reliable secondary sources say about a topic, and not editors' personal opinions and analysis about that topic. If someone wanted to effectively WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS on a (sub)topic without adequate coverage, the way to do it would be for them and/or others to write things about it that appeared in reliable edited sources that could then be used (accurately) as references. Such coverage hasn't happened in over half a decade, however, and those who could so write/publish may not be interested in expending the resources or giving Sinfest the publicity. The lesser alternative would be for a subject matter expert to cover it under the WP:SPS exception on their blog, etc (but see previous discussions on this Talkpage for the difficulties with that). ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 23:58, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

I have not, nor do I plan on doing so. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:22, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

So you've never seen what you're calling insufficient? ~2026-90825-7 (talk) 23:11, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't care about the comic and it doesn't matter because Wikipedia has to base such claims on a reliable source and not an editor's interpretation. There is a thing called parody and mockery for example. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Kleefeld has written a follow-up article noting the changes in Sinfest since his 2020 writing on it, especially the now-constant overt antisemitism, which has become extreme enough that he expresses "legitimate concern" for Ishida. He also explicitly contrasts its Hitler-as-hero plotline with prior art that explored Nazi perspectives from a clearly satirical or heavily-qualified point-of-view, noting Sinfest's lack of counternarratives and embrace of specific esoteric conspiracy theories and ahistorical narratives as evidence of its sincerity. I've added references to his commentary in the intro and History section and clarified the subsection headers to better reflect three broad eras (early years, the "radfem" era, and the post-2020 shift to conspiracies and explicit antisemitism). I've also replaced the existing 2000-era black-and-white panel image with a partial low-res panel from the beginning of the current long-term arc (which portrays Hitler as a heroic/quasi-religious figure) to supplement. It is the only image in the article (not counting the logo) and is IMHO much more representative of modern Sinfest's content and tone. Jordan117 (talk) 04:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Info Box

There are no citations to label Sinfest as satire and comedy as genres. Why do there need to be citations to label is as Nazi? ~2026-17252-99 (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-17252-99: makes sense, i've removed it. ltbdl (challenge) 02:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

I've reverted -- comedy is already cited multiple times on the page. Satire is covered in two of the first ten refs ("a satirical webcomic"; "political satire"), and quite possibly more in the remainder. I don't see that we need to explicitly cite it, but if we do I'd prefer expansion to the body to cluttering up the infobox with refs. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 02:51, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

hmm, maybe in its early years. but is it really accurate, especially in view of Sinfest § Later changes in direction and themes? ltbdl (operate) 02:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

"Satire is a genre... in which vices, follies, abuses, and shortcomings are held up to ridicule, often with the intent of exposing or shaming the perceived flaws of individuals, corporations, government, or society itself into improvement". Looks like it still applies, though one may well may not appreciate the creator's targets, his perception of "abuses"/ "flaws" / "vices", or the "improvement" he desires. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 03:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

ok, fair. but comedy? ltbdl (squeeze) 07:01, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

My only previous reading of Sinfest was a brief review in some earlier month (yeah it's antisemitic). I've no idea to what degree the strip is expected to be funny to its audience (and whether it is intended to swing from humourous to serious non-humourous), but the 2025-03-18 strip and others around that appear clearly intended to be (I really don't feel like looking too much at the current run). If we had RS analysis -- if only -- then the era technique that Cerebus the Aardvark uses could work for better segmentation. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 10:06, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

So if comedy is acceptable because it is referenced in the article, then hate speech as a category is acceptable. that has managed after years to finally be in the article itself. fair is fair. ~2026-17252-99 (talk) 14:47, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

One has to be able to cite anything if necessary (WP:V), but generally that doesn't include needing to put refs in infoboxes (MOS:INFOBOXCITE) provided that the information is covered in citations used in the body of the article. Finding the cites for comedy and satire is left as an exercise (hint: comedy --"humor"-- is pretty trivial, and satire --"satirical"-- is in one of the first handful of refs). Per the interminable discussion above and in the archives, what we don't have is anything close to a reliable source explicitly stating anything along the lines of antisemitism (Noting that Nazism is a specific ideology and thus very unlikely to be correct description, and that antisemitism was hardly an invention of the Nazis).

(Spelling this out so it can just be copied and pasted in the near-inevitable future)

If you or anyone want coverage of the strip's antisemitism (and no, we can't just use our eyes and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS), then either:

1. Find some modern coverage of Sinfest in some sufficiently reliable published source that can be quoted.
2. Persuade a reliable source to cover Sinfest in its modern state, and then quote that.
3. Find a sufficiently unambiguous statement from the creator (twitter, newsletter, interview, etc) that can be quoted.
4. Persuade the creator to provide a sufficiently unambiguous public statement of intent in his choice of topics
5. Find one or more statements from Subject Matter Experts that can be quoted.
6. Persuade one or more Subject Matter Experts to opine.

... and if you want more than attributed opinion -- for the article to state in WP:WIKIVOICE that Sinfest is currently antisemitic -- then find sufficiently unambiguous commentary from the creator and/or a bunch of coverage from unrelated reliable sources (#1 & #2) that can show a level of consensus.

If you can't or don't want to do the above, then either:

1. Live with the fact that Wikipedia articles can have a significant lag from reality / public consensus / trends, and that this one really does not reflect the current state of the strip well.
2. Complain fruitlessly that the article does not properly reflect the current state of the strip. (Please do it elsewhere if you need to vent... this is not seriously in dispute)
3. Try to change the article without having the necessary sources, and get reverted and possibly worse. (Please don't)

^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 02:41, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

WP:PROPORTION & WP:CATDEF

@Hatman31 Can you clarify your reasoning as for your edit to revert the description of the comic as Neo-Nazi? If your objection is based on it being only a minor part of Sinfest now (which could be argued if he made only one or two strips praising the Nazis), then I think you are gravely mistaken. Ishida has spent nearly 200 strips glorifying Hitler and openly lamenting his defeat in WW2 now. That is hardly a minor part of his comic and there is every indication he is entirely sincere.

If your objection is on lack of sourcing that describes it as Nazi, then that's more understandable as only one reliable source does, but webcomic sourcing is very sparse in general and I think that source is comprehensive enough on describing Ishida's evolution to Nazism that it isn't imbalanced to describe it as such. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 12:46, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

The latter; we have one self-published source covering this that doesn't even use the term "neo-Nazi" to describe the webcomic; that's not nearly enough to make it DUE for the lead. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 02:53, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Fair. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 14:38, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

@Hatman31, would describing the comic as "Nazi" instead of "Neo-Nazi" be more palatable to you? The small difference is that our Neo-Nazism article describes it as "all social, political, and militant ideologies and movements that have professed or idealized Nazism, whether in whole or in part, since the end of World War II". And it's not clear whether the comic arises from or is affiliated with any such larger group, organization, or ideology. What is clear, indisputably, is that it espouses and promotes the statements, positions and deeds of the original NSDAP; see the strip for June 22, 2026, which consists of a Goebbels quote overlaid on Jews preying on women (the character, Koshchei the Deathless, is established as a Jew stand-in two days earlier); today's comic, which is about how Nazi atrocities in Stalingrad were the responsibility of Jewish infiltrators in the Nazi ranks and sees the nefarious infiltrator bloodily killed by the heroic Wehrmacht; the praise heaped on Hitler, which I can gather for you if I need to; and so on and so forth. This comic has indisputably "increasingly embraced conspiratorial, Nazi, and antisemitic themes", as I'd suggest to have the lead say. A small difference to be sure, but we're editing an encyclopedia and have only ourselves to blame for having to nitpick. It's reflected, I think, in Kleefeld, who references Nazism, not Neo-Nazism.

If the word choice makes no difference to you, I'd be grateful for your thoughts on the following. While working on recent events and other outrages du jour, I've had to become familiar with WP:CONTEXTMATTERS, part of WP:RS: we must consider not only the quality of a source, but the quality of a source relative to the job it's being asked to do. Oftentimes this makes our job harder, but sometimes it works in the other direction. I've successfully used less-than-stellar news sites, ones I wouldn't generally accept as references, to cite things like "official/spokesperson X said Y". Straightforward factual statements where they said it, it was on film, it wasn't disputed, I just needed something that put it in writing. Note how many entries in WP:RSP are considered appropriate on a case-by-case basis - what a source is being used for makes a big difference. In our case Kleefeld as a source isn't optimal, but it's tolerable, and when it's being used for as much of a straightforward factual statement as saying that the blatant Nazi comic (that quotes Goebbels about how a victory of the Jews would mean eternal darkness, effusively praises Hitler, does the salute but prefers the Schwarze Sonne, depicts the WWII German Army as liberators pure as driven snow performing a desperately needed un-Jewing, etcetera, and in all seriousness as Kleefeld usefully points out) has, in fact, increasingly embraced Nazi themes… I think it can swing that. --Kizor 00:56, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

I can see your point, but to be honest I don't think it's particularly close: while context matters, even Kleefeld doesn't explicitly call the comic a Nazi comic or state that it "embraced Nazi themes". It would be clear WP:OR to refer to the comic as such. IMO we could potentially make a simple, factual claim supported by Kleefeld, something like "The December 2025 storyline was a re-telling of World War II that frames Adolf Hitler as a hero." Cheers, Suriname0 (talk) 15:36, 27 July 2026 (UTC)

This is more or less where I'm at too; making a statement about the comic's ideology based on this one source would risk being original research whereas using marginally reliable news sites to reference WP:ABOUTSELF-like statements wouldn't. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 00:42, 30 July 2026 (UTC)

Categorization problem

This article is currently in Category:Antisemitism in the United States. However, that category page states that "it must not include articles about individuals, groups or media that are allegedly anti-Semitic."

The category should be removed on that basis. I will not be doing it myself, as I have a WP:COI with the creator of the strip, due to collaborating with him on some small projects decades ago. (That should not be taken as indicating my endorsement of any of his views.) I ask that others consider this request and remove the category if appropriate. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 23:05, 25 September 2026 (UTC)

 Done ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 00:31, 26 September 2026 (UTC)