I agree with most of what you suggest. My quibble is that I doubt Q planted it. It is not consistent primarily because there is something at play (possibly admissibility in court) that does not allow Q to simply tell us everything.
Q alludes in very cryptic fashion when the topic is ops that have not yet occurred. At other times Q comes out and explains what happened. The example in the graphic you posted seems to obviously be open source yet Q cannot tell us how to find it. Only hints.