trustmebro.to/r/…
✓ checked
trust me, bro:
here is the receipt.
the claim

The Mona Lisa was stolen from the Louvre in 1911.

the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
Recorded sources
7 sources for · 0 against

Counts group repeated records of the same source within each side. They do not measure evidence strength or source independence.

Is it true that the Mona Lisa was stolen from the Louvre in 1911?

Yes. Multiple reference and peer-reviewed sources state that the Mona Lisa was stolen from the Louvre in 1911 by Vincenzo Peruggia, with one source giving the date as 21 August 1911.

Verdict: SUPPORTED · 7 sources for, 0 against · Last checked

Evidence for · 7
Get citation
Wikipedia: The Mona Lisa Has Been Stolen. (n.d.). en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mona_Lisa_Has_Been_Stolen

See more details
More for · 6
Get citation
Mona Lisa. (n.d.). en.wikipedia.org. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_Lisa

2015
Get citation
Mona Lisa Is Missing. (2015). doi.org. https://doi.org/10.59236/emro.v17i1a5974

2024
Get citation
Thefts of the Mona Lisa. (2024). doi.org. https://doi.org/10.5040/9798216427490

1911
Get citation
THE " MONA LISA" MYSTERY. (Poverty Bay Herald, 23 September 1911). (1911). paperspast.natlib.govt.nz. https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBH19110923.2.74.66

Get citation
The Heist that Made the Mona Lisa Famous | HISTORY. (n.d.). history.com. https://www.history.com/articles/the-heist-that-made-the-mona-lisa-famous

2014
Get citation
author, G. J. (2014). Framed in France. archive.org. https://archive.org/details/framedinfrance0000gree_j4y4

Anyone with this link can read the claim and its public receipt, including any personal information in that text. Open permanent receipt.
Check your own claim
Challenge the receipt
Requests are recorded for review. This does not start an automatic check or guarantee a response time.

Citation formatting by citeproc-js (Frank Bennett) and the Citation Style Language project. Source and licenses.

This receipt is an automated verdict against our published method · not an opinion about any author or publication.
Terms · Privacy · How verdicts work