Misplaced Pages

Talk:Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories/FAQ: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Talk:Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:38, 23 July 2009 editDems on the move (talk | contribs)1,749 edits Undid revision 303805732 by Jbarta) "weak concensus" is a POV. This is a basic warning that trying to argue the matter again is futile.← Previous edit Latest revision as of 19:35, 11 February 2018 edit undoNapoliRoma (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users18,280 edits Added new Q/A on use of "false" to describe claims 
(13 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>{{FAQ page}}</noinclude> <noinclude>{{FAQ page}}</noinclude>

] '''To view the response to a question, click the <nowiki></nowiki> link to the right of the question.'''
⚫ :'''Q1''': Isn't the use of the terms "conspiracy theories" and "fringe" in the article title and body a violation of ]?
<div class="boilerplate metadata" style="{{divstylegray}} padding:2px;"><center><b>Please see ] for more frequently asked questions</b></center>
⚫ :'''A1''': No. A preponderance of ] have treated and referred to the topic as a fringe conspiracy theory, rather than a legitimate controversy. The article reflects these sources as per Misplaced Pages's policy of ]. ] on the article title has been established through a ] and has been ] ] ]
{{FAQ row
:'''Q2''': What about the word "false" or "falsely"? Is it appropriate for a Misplaced Pages article to state that claims are false?
⚫ |q=Q1<nowiki>:</nowiki>Isn't the use of the terms "conspiracy theories" and "fringe" in the article title and body a violation of ]?
:'''A2''': Yes. ] is that fringe theories should not be given undue weight. Presenting a fringe theory as an unchallenged possibility gives undue credence to that theory. ("...we should not describe these two opposing viewpoints as being equal to each other ... for instance, forms of historical revisionism that are considered by more reliable sources to either lack evidence or actively ignore evidence.")
⚫ |a='''A1''': No. ] have treated and referred to the topic as a fringe conspiracy theory, rather than a legitimate controversy. The article reflects these sources as per Misplaced Pages's policy of ]. ] on the article title has been established through a ] and has been ] ] ]}}
⚫ :'''Q3''': Can we discuss renaming the article or removing the "fringe" or "false" labeling?
{{FAQ row
⚫ :'''A3''': Yes. ], so new perspective on this issue is welcome, but please do not rehash old arguments. Please review the archives to see past discussions on this topic, and keep in mind ] and ] when you frame your discussion.
⚫ |q=Q2<nowiki>:</nowiki>Can we discuss renaming the article or removing the "fringe" labeling?
:'''Q4''': The Certification of Live Birth isn't a Birth Certificate, is it?
⚫ |a='''A2''': Yes. ], so new perspective on this issue is welcome, but please review the archives to see past discussions on this topic, and keep in mind ] and ] when you frame your discussion. Note that unless new references in ] claim that the theories are mainstream and no longer fringe, it is unlikely that a change in concensus would form.}}
:'''A4''': Hawaii has never issued a document with the title "Birth Certificate". Instead, their certificate is titled, "Certification Of Live Birth". The law stipulates that it fulfills all of the functions for which anyone needs a birth certificate. It is therefore misleading to suggest that it is somehow not a ].

Latest revision as of 19:35, 11 February 2018

Below are answers to frequently asked questions about the corresponding page Barack Obama citizenship conspiracy theories. They address concerns, questions, and misconceptions which have repeatedly arisen on the talk page. Please update this material when needed.

Q1: Isn't the use of the terms "conspiracy theories" and "fringe" in the article title and body a violation of Misplaced Pages's policy on neutrality?
A1: No. A preponderance of reliable sources have treated and referred to the topic as a fringe conspiracy theory, rather than a legitimate controversy. The article reflects these sources as per Misplaced Pages's policy of verifiability. Consensus on the article title has been established through a RFC and has been repeatedly reaffirmed since.
Q2: What about the word "false" or "falsely"? Is it appropriate for a Misplaced Pages article to state that claims are false?
A2: Yes. Misplaced Pages policy is that fringe theories should not be given undue weight. Presenting a fringe theory as an unchallenged possibility gives undue credence to that theory. ("...we should not describe these two opposing viewpoints as being equal to each other ... for instance, forms of historical revisionism that are considered by more reliable sources to either lack evidence or actively ignore evidence.")
Q3: Can we discuss renaming the article or removing the "fringe" or "false" labeling?
A3: Yes. Consensus can change, so new perspective on this issue is welcome, but please do not rehash old arguments. Please review the archives to see past discussions on this topic, and keep in mind Misplaced Pages policies and reliable sources when you frame your discussion.
Q4: The Certification of Live Birth isn't a Birth Certificate, is it?
A4: Hawaii has never issued a document with the title "Birth Certificate". Instead, their certificate is titled, "Certification Of Live Birth". The law stipulates that it fulfills all of the functions for which anyone needs a birth certificate. It is therefore misleading to suggest that it is somehow not a birth certificate.
Category: