|
Welcome to the fringe theories noticeboard | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||||||
Additional notes:
|
||||||||
To start a new request, enter the name of the relevant article below:
|
Archives |
---|
Contents
- 1 Integral Thought
- 2 Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
- 3 Mainstream vs. consensus science: a discussion
- 4 Crack epidemic
- 5 Peter Dale Scott
- 6 The Corbett Report
- 7 2011 Vancouver UFO sighting
- 8 Vaccine-related user issue at BLP noticeboard
- 9 Deepak Chopra
- 10 Alexander Unzicker
- 11 Flower of life (again)
- 12 Vesica piscis
- 13 Metatron's cube
Integral Thought
There's a walled garden of articles linked to Integral_theory_(Ken_Wilber) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) / {{Integral thought}}, the contents of which read like the Sokal paper. I cannot tell if this is normal psychobabble, or fringe nonsense. All I can tell is that it makes grandiose claims and includes weapons grade arm-waving. Guy (Help!) 11:53, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
- We tried to clean house from these articles a few months back. Turns out there is a rather large group of transhumanists watching these articles. Integral Transformative Practice is particularly awful. jps (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- Also, should Integral education be a redirect? jps (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
I am wondering if someone more familiar with the MMR vaccine controversy might want to take a look at this article, specifically Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.#Views on autism and vaccines. First, it seems to me that the section should at least have a link to the controversy, otherwise his views on this wouldn't be notable. Second, the last bit gives a fair amount of weight to a statement he made in Sacramento. The source for that quote also quotes Richard Pan saying: "I think it is dangerous that he is spreading misinformation about something that’s very important for public health." Should that be included as notable criticism of his views? - Location (talk) 02:11, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- This appears to tie in with Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard#Vaccine-related user issue at BLP noticeboard. - Location (talk) 04:34, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Mainstream vs. consensus science: a discussion
Talk:List_of_organizations_opposing_mainstream_science#Requested_move_26_October_2015
I encourage some comments there.
jps (talk) 16:09, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Crack epidemic
Crack epidemic ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Crack epidemic appears to give way too much weight Gary Webb and the conspiracy theory that the CIA caused the "crack epidemic", and far too little coverage to the actual growth of crack usage. This should probably be reworked as History of crack cocaine with the conspiracy stuff moved back to the conspiracy-themed Allegations of CIA drug trafficking or CIA involvement in Contra cocaine trafficking. (I honestly cannot keep up with all the various articles suggesting that the CIA was/is involved in drug dealing.) Ping Rgr09. - Location (talk) 04:45, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Crack epidemic is a particularly unhelpful article as it stands. The CIA-Contra stuff takes up almost two thirds of the actual text of the article, not counting the lists at the end. This is wildly excessive. It has all the usual problems on this subject: it fails to distinguish between the Kerry report, which accuses the Contras, and Gary Webb, who implicates the CIA. This is a common theme throughout most of the Wikipedia coverage of the 'CIA-Cocaine' connection. It gives an inadequate description of what Webb actually claimed and suppresses all mention of the severe criticism that Webb's version of the origins and spread of crack cocaine attracted. Could use a rewrite of this content for sure, but I doubt that I'll have time in the near future; maybe next year.
- The article name itself does not necessarily reflect a conspiratorial mindset; for example, 'Crack Epidemic' is used as a section title on a DEA webpage cited in the article. Nonetheless, it is a vague, ill-defined metaphor that makes it hard to improve the article. Renaming it History of crack cocaine would certainly help, the current article would fit in as one section of a larger, better defined piece. I support a name change along those lines. Rgr09 (talk) 08:54, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
-
- For future reference, this source should be used: The CIA-Contra-Crack Cocaine Controversy: A Review of the Justice Department's Investigations and Prosecutions (December, 1997 - released July, 1998). The DOJ/OIG report followed the Kerry Report and addressed Webb's charges. - Location (talk) 15:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Peter Dale Scott
For those familiar with 9/11 conspiracy theories and 9/11 Truth movement, I am asking for input in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Peter Dale Scott. Thanks! - Location (talk) 00:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
The Corbett Report
Has anyone heard of this guy and his rather fringey podcast and blogs? I am thinking of AFDing it, but I thought maybe some of you might have ideas though. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:15, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
- Have I heard of it? Yes. Is it notable? Doubtful. I don't think it's popped up on the radar of the WP:RS literature. Or, at least, I can't find any sources. jps (talk) 15:01, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
2011 Vancouver UFO sighting
2011 Vancouver UFO sighting ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Notable enough for a standalone article, or another example of WP:RECENTISM gone amuck? I am of the opinion that this particular incident is no more notable than a library of similar kinds of incidents. It received the same local news coverage and then died like so many before and after it. jps (talk) 15:05, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
-
- A self-confessed hoaxer rigged a kite with LED lights, as reported by United Press International. This is really the totality of the story. However our article seems to give equal validity to UFO-org spokespeople. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:40, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Need admin eyes for recurring BLP violations. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:03, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Deepak Chopra
It's that time again: another off-wiki assault on our article. May need more than usual vigilance from fringe-savvy folk. Alexbrn (talk) 07:49, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- The author of the piece does have a Wikipedia account that has been actively editing related articles over the last few weeks (though the account refrains from editing the Deepak Chopra article in particular). Owing to WP:OUTING rules, that's all the more that I'm going to say, but since activity in alternative health articles seems to be something the account is not necessarily going to avoid, a WP:COIN case may be worthwhile. jps (talk) 13:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
- doesn't appear to be here to build an encyclopaedia!-Roxy the dog™ woof 14:13, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Alexander Unzicker
Alexander Unzicker ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Wrote one cranky book published by a reputable publisher which was panned by Peter Woit. And that's it as far as notability is concerned. Should we have a WP:FRINGEBLP on the man?
jps (talk) 22:33, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
Flower of life (again)
We deleted is 6 months ago because it failed inclusion guidelines for fringe sources. Now it's back:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flower of Life (geometry).
jps (talk) 13:04, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Vesica piscis
Vesica piscis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Is there any part of this article which is not original research? Much of it appears to be WP:SYNTH. jps (talk) 13:09, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Metatron's cube
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metatron's Cube
There seems to be a lot of these kinds of articles about. jps (talk) 13:13, 5 November 2015 (UTC)