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.
reptilian shapeshifters is linked to the wiki article on reptiles and there is no reference there to reptilian shapeshifters. ] (]) 00:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
reptilian shapeshifters is linked to the wiki article on reptiles and there is no reference there to reptilian shapeshifters. ] (]) 00:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
== So proud! ==
Dickipedia. Im curious how the community is adjusting to the fact that nobody gives a ____ about dickipedia for anything other than statistics? Be brief ... but long winded. State your case with scientific rigor. Justify all your sources as fact through your favorite fact checking gangbang. ] (]) 04:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
Revision as of 10:49, 25 October 2023
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Icke article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Association football on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FootballWikipedia:WikiProject FootballTemplate:WikiProject Footballfootball
This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
The contentious topics procedure applies to this article. Parts of this article relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic. Furthermore, the following rules apply when editing the parts of the page related to the contentious topic:
You must be logged-in and extended-confirmed to edit or discuss this topic on any page (except for making edit requests, provided they are not disruptive)
You may not make more than 1 revert within 24 hours on any edits related to this topic
If it is unclear which parts of the page are related to this contentious topic, the content in question should be marked within the wiki text by an invisible comment. If no comment is present, please ask an administrator for assistance. If in doubt it is better to assume that the content is covered.
Further information
The exceptions to the extended confirmed restriction are:
Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive.
Non-extended-confirmed editors may not create new articles, but administrators may exercise discretion when deciding how to enforce this remedy on article creations. Deletion of new articles created by non-extended-confirmed editors is permitted but not required.
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction:
Clear vandalism of whatever origin may be reverted without restriction. Also, reverts made solely to enforce the extended confirmed restriction are not considered edit warring.
Editors who violate this restriction may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offence.
As of 2003 the reptilian bloodline encompassed 43 American presidents, three British and two Canadian prime ministers, several Sumerian kings and Egyptian pharaohs, and a smattering of celebrities, including Bob Hope, Chris Christopherson and Boxcar Willie. Key bloodlines are the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, various European aristocratic families, the establishment families of the Eastern United States, and the British House of Windsor.
The referenced page of Barkun2003 is on archive.org and doesn't include any of those claims, nor could I find them in the rest of the chapter on Icke. Unfortunately, SlimVirgin isn't alive any more so I can't ask her. I don't want to simply delete as unfounded the work of a very experienced editor, but this needs fixing.
Mbethke (talk) 10:39, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
The diff you added only shows SV re-arranging the material. It appears to have been added much earlier. Looking back a little farther, say here, there's a much more detailed reference that breaks down the sources. Not clear if that covers every claim, but more ground to cover at least. Kuru(talk)13:42, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
I've never been able to find a single reliable source for the claim that Icke believes in this farcical "Reptilian" theory. I'm 99% sure it's simply a smear tactic used against him to put people off listening to the other (very legitimate) subjects he speaks about. A bunch of links to articles in far left rags claiming that he said this or that (with zero sources) isn't worthy of mentioning in an encyclopedia, nor does it make the claims true. All of these smears and falsified "beliefs" that have been pinned on him should be entirely removed from the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.204.195 (talk • contribs)
There seem to be thousands, including his own publications and many interviews where he promotes these claims. This includes many conservative outlets. I'm sorry, but since your claim appears to make zero sense on its face, perhaps you can clarify your position first? Are you saying he's being sarcastic the whole way through? Kuru(talk)01:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
@82.2.204.195 For some reason I can’t reply to the IP address directly, but in this interviewhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlAjeTunopo he says that at 4:00. Note that Icke essentially replies that “The phrase ‘The world is run by shapeshifting lizards’ is a one line oversimplification without my backstory or context, if you read deeper into it and into my works you will understand it better.” but upon further examination it remains equally as false and baseless with no real or valid evidence. This isn’t a smear, those claims are real.
Also note that the interviewer and others say that some of Icke’s other claims in the video are based on events that have actually happened so at least those theories and claims have got that going for them, that being they are based in part on reality, but the claim “Buckingham palace and the world is run by shapeshifting lizards and reptiles” is one he appears to genuinely agree with and has touted for years Justanotherguy54 (talk) 02:40, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
References
Cite error: The named reference Barkun2003p104 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Claims
Adding this here to avoid an edit-war. I recently went in and changed multiple references to 'claims' to more neutral language in accordance with WP:CLAIM and, in doing so, helped remedy some WP:NPOV issues. This has since been reverted by @Hob Gadling on the basis of "WP:CLAIMdoes not say that we should never use the word, but "To say that someone asserted or claimed something can call their statement's credibility into question" - which is exactly what we should do for statements which do not deserve any credibility".
For the avoidance of doubt, I agree that the statements lack credibility (Ike is labelled, correctly, as a conspiracy theorist after all), but I do think that belief, in and of itself, is not a neutral point of view. NPOV states "A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize. When editorial bias towards one particular point of view can be detected the article needs to be fixed. The only bias that should be evident is the bias attributed to the source." It would appear, rather, that we fix this not with the use of 'claims' throughout, but through making sure that we don't create false balance. As the NPOV article continues "There are many such beliefs in the world, some popular and some little-known: claims that the Earth is flat, that the Knights Templar possessed the Holy Grail, that the Apollo Moon landings were a hoax, and similar ones. Conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, speculative history, or plausible but currently unaccepted theories should not be legitimized through comparison to accepted academic scholarship. We do not take a stand on these issues as encyclopedia writers, for or against; we merely omit this information where including it would unduly legitimize it, and otherwise include and describe these ideas in their proper context concerning established scholarship and the beliefs of the wider world.". Ergo we need to make sure each 'claim' is described in its proper context. We can achieve this by either linking to or borrowing from relevant pages - for example the Reptilian conspiracy theory, which manages to cover the subject without frequent use of 'claims' and other npov language. In doing so the following:
According to Ike, there is an inter-dimensional race of reptilian beings, the Archons or Anunnaki, which have hijacked the Earth.
...would become:
Ike is a proponent of the Reptilian conspiracy theory, believing that there is an inter-dimensional race of reptilian beings, which have hijacked the Earth.
Use of the link to a conspiracy theory page, here, would provide context without comparison to accepted academic scholarship.
You should read WP:FRINGE and WP:FALSEBALANCE. Icke is so far out that it would be perverse to stay in the middle between him and reality.
If your interpretation of WP:CLAIM were correct and the use of the word "claim" were inappropriate for Icke, then it would be better to clearly state "Never use that word".