Talk:Project Veritas

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Project Veritas article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 21 days

faq page Frequently asked questions To view an explanation, click the [show] link to the right of a question. Q1: Why does this article describe Project Veritas negatively? A1: Wikipedia's aim is not to ensure articles are neither overtly positive or negative, but to ensure articles are written based on what reliable sources say; the neutral point of view policy defines neutrality as representing fairly, proportionately, and, as far as possible, without editorial bias, all the significant views that have been published by reliable sources on a topic. This means that if many reliable sources have a negative opinion of a subject, the article will most likely be negative. Since most reliable sources describe Project Veritas negatively, this article also describes Project Veritas negatively. Q2: Why does this article say that Project Veritas is far-right? A2: The "far-right" descriptor is amply and reliably sourced. Over a dozen independent and reliable sources describe Project Veritas as a far-right organization. Please see these references for details. Q3: Why does this article say that Project Veritas is an "activist group"? A3: The "activist" descriptor is based on many multiple independent and reliable sources. These sources describe Project Veritas as an activist organization or a group of activists. Please see these references for details. Q4: Why does this article say that Project Veritas edited videos "deceptively"? A4: The "deceptive" phrasing is cited to many multiple high-quality reliable sources. More than a dozen independent and reliable sources describe Project Veritas editing its videos in a "deceptive", "misleading", or "manipulative" manner. Please see these references for details. Q5: But what if the sources are biased? A5: Reliable sources are, according to Wikipedia:Reliable sources § Biased or opinionated sources, not required to be neutral, unbiased, or objective. If you have reliable sources that express contrary points of view or refute any statements in this article, please feel free to discuss them here. If you are unsure if a source is reliable, you can check to see if it is listed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources § Sources or search the archives of Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard to see if its reliability has been discussed in the past. Q6: Shouldn't this article avoid using as sources media outlets against which Project Veritas has published exposés? A6: Some editors have made the argument that, because Project Veritas has targeted various news outlets (such as The Washington Post, CNN, and NPR) in its operations, those news outlets should be considered unreliable with respect to Project Veritas due to conflict of interest. A 2020 discussion at Wikipedia talk:Verifiability found that disqualification of sources based on alleged conflicts of interest such as this did not have community consensus.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. The entire article relates to the following contentious topics: Post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people abortion Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator.

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting.

This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

United States Low‑importance United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Organizations Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Conservatism Low‑importance Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Politics: American Low‑importance Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance). New York (state): Hudson Valley Low‑importance New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Hudson Valley (assessed as Mid-importance). Journalism Low‑importance Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Media Low‑importance Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments Skepticism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Sal at PV (talk · contribs) has been paid by Project Veritas on their behalf.

Project Vertias referenced for helping the EPA to discover $20B in "wasted funds"

Should a summary of this story be listed in the Notable Incidents section?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/epa-administrator-zeldin-demands-return-20b-taxpayer-money-wasted-biden-administration EnSingHemm (talk) 22:09, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no: WP:FOXNEWSPOLITICS soibangla (talk) 22:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Washington Post has since reported on it as well

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2025/02/12/lee-zeldin-epa-climate-funding/ EnSingHemm (talk) 23:52, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's common knowledge that the new administration thinks any funds related to climate change are "wasted". But I don't see a good reason to include this here. O3000, Ret. (talk) 19:09, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, did you even click their links? They have video of someone from the EPA admitting that they are wasting the funds.. Tschwitzer (talk) 11:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fox is not an RS. Slatersteven (talk) 11:56, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Fox is not an RS." But they are very good in unintentional comedy, their blatant lies being so obvious. Dimadick (talk) 11:58, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]