::::::TyTyMang hit the nail on the head, and I don't understand why we need to keep restating this point. It is true that the journalists eventually draw conclusions on Gamergate. But this discussion is not about that analysis. This current discussion is about how the journalists describe the stated goals of Gamergate, and whether these goals are described as being held by "most" of "some" of the supporters. And I must respectfully disagree; we're not basing this conclusion off of "two sentences." I can post many more examples, and I have before, but inevitably any source I post that states the exact thing we're discussing is straw manned and/or ignored. The question was:  I gave two examples of highly-reliable sources with the exact quote. After I did that, another editor responds with  This is not true. I have presented two highly-reliable sources that use the word "most." This fact is not undermined at any point in the article. The fact that most Gamergaters believe their movement is about ethics is not contested. In fact, in the other WaPo article you posted, you must have missed this sentence: "Failing to disclose those conflicts, many supporters said, is 'disrespectful' to those who read game sites, and that's the core of what makes them so mad." So that's a third article, and three sentences that describe ethical views as being held by a majority of supporters. As an added bonus, here is a fourth article, from the New York Times "The instigators of the campaign are allied with a broader movement that has rallied around the Twitter hashtag #GamerGate, a term adopted by those who see ethical problems among game journalists and political correctness in their coverage. The more extreme threats, though, seem to be the work of a much smaller faction and aimed at women." The NYT writer describes the bulk of the movement as concerned about ethical problems, and a smaller faction concerned with harassment and threats aimed at women. Okay. So I now have four incredibly reliable sources saying that ethical concerns are the focus of the majority of supporters. Can you provide four equally reliable sources that say that ethical concerns are only the focus of a minority of supporters, as is currently claimed in the article space?