Talk:David Icke: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 05:11, 5 November 2022 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk \| contribs)Bots, Template editors2,291,918 editsm Archiving 1 discussion(s) to Talk:David Icke/Archive 5) (bot← Previous edit		Revision as of 04:40, 25 April 2023 edit undoItsfini (talk \| contribs)271 edits →Claims: new sectionTag: New topic Next edit →
Line 59:		Line 59:

	The letter from the Dutch government is on Icke's website , but it is in Dutch. It is confirmed to be correct by the Dutch government. '''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 13:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)		The letter from the Dutch government is on Icke's website , but it is in Dutch. It is confirmed to be correct by the Dutch government. '''''] <sup>]</sup>''''' 13:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

			== 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 @] on the basis of "] ''does 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 ], 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 ] or ], which have hijacked the Earth.
			...would become:
			Ike is a proponent of the ], 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.

			I could be entirely wrong here though and would welcome discussion. ] (]) 04:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Revision as of 04:40, 25 April 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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5Auto-archiving period: 30 days

This page is not a forum for general discussion about David Icke. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about David Icke at the Reference desk.

This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

David Icke has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 29, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed
December 7, 2008	Good article reassessment	Delisted
February 28, 2010	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

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 sourced must 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.

Biography: Sports and Games

	Biography portal 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
	Sports portal This article is supported by the sports and games work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Football: England Low‑importance

	Association football portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	English football portal This article is supported by the English football task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Paranormal

	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 has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative views High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Skepticism High‑importance

	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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Warning: active arbitration remedies

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

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

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.

After being warned, contentious topics procedure can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process. Contentious topic sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.
Editors may report violations of these restrictions to the Arbitration enforcement noticeboard.

If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. When in doubt, don't revert!

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Template:Vital article

Proposal for a personal life section

It is common in BLPs for a personal life section to be placed near the end of the article with marriages etc. I won't monitor this page but am putting forward the suggestion. Jontel (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

New article: Brian Rose

An article for an associate of Icke's, Brian Rose (podcaster), has been created. I thought editors here might be interested and help to improve it. Bondegezou (talk) 10:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Reptilians quotes

User:SlimVirgin added this section in 2016:

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)

References

Cite error: The named reference Barkun2003p104 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

please update the book section

It is missing 2 books — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C5:14AE:2600:1D61:6C7:A3F5:B46A (talk) 00:15, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

This may well be true, but could you name the books?--♦IanMacM♦ 06:35, 30 March 2022 (UTC)

Icke's ban from the Netherlands

The letter from the Dutch government is on Icke's website here, but it is in Dutch. It is confirmed to be correct by the Dutch government. ♦IanMacM♦ 13:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

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:CLAIM does 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.

I could be entirely wrong here though and would welcome discussion. Itsfini (talk) 04:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Categories: