I see no claim in the article that anyone can prove who has been posting as Q. The topic appears to be who’s responsible for popularizing Q, not who Q actually is.
And even that's not factual. . . these three or four are just three or four among hundreds on YouTube, many who predated them. Q slapped Corsi down because Corsi was using Q as a means of selling his books.
We caught people changing the names of pre-existing YouTube videos to comport with things mentioned in Q Drops, yet the video obviously was in existence prior to Q mentioning it to get hits off of Q. . . I saw one change names between when I first accessed the channel and when I moved to the next video. caught the owner in the act! Q anons thought they'd found something important in the names of the videos when THEY were the frauds, trying to piggyback on Q.