Interestingly, Mussolini getting the trains to run on time is a myth as well.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/loco-motive/

It's similar to how the Nazis claimed the Autobahn as their success, even though they were started under the Weimar Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichsautobahn

Is Snopes having a hard time with money? The article (on mobile) had two huge full-width ads that you had to scroll past, and a persistent banner ad at the bottom, and they're still asking for donations:

https://files.catbox.moe/szanpo.jpeg

https://files.catbox.moe/j9qerx.jpeg

I don't mind them trying to fund themselves, but those aren't exactly vetted "ethical ads", are they?

You say that yet even catbox.moe is asking for money. Go check their front page.

But the page isn't covered in user-hostile ads that rely on intensive surveillance and sharing your personal data with dozens of shady companies.

Edit: Your comment really bothers me. At no point did I suggest that websites should not ask their users for money. I was wondering about and criticizing their apparently heavy use of user-abusive ads, while still asking users directly for money. Usually on the Web we see one or the other but not both.

I sorry to disturb you. It was not my intent. I just disagree about the seriousness of the ads displayed in your example. An ad for Whisky and/or Walgreens(a pharmacy) don't seem too bad compared to other ads I have seen.

Snopes probably gets a lot of bandwidth (and probably attacks) just due to them being very mainstream.

It is rhetorically pretty direct to talk about "Brain scientists and rocket surgeons".