Talk:Alex Jones: Difference between revisions
→Let's review, shall we?: Reply |
→Possible russian propagandist: new section |
||
Line 93: | Line 93: | ||
It says that Gary Allen wrote "None Dare Call it Treason." I believe this is incorrect. [[Special:Contributions/2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2|2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2]] ([[User talk:2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2|talk]]) 04:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
It says that Gary Allen wrote "None Dare Call it Treason." I believe this is incorrect. [[Special:Contributions/2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2|2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2]] ([[User talk:2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2|talk]]) 04:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
||
: Huh? "Treason" isn't used anywhere in the article, but ''None Dare Call it Conspiracy'' is, and that book is definitely written by Allen. [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 09:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
: Huh? "Treason" isn't used anywhere in the article, but ''None Dare Call it Conspiracy'' is, and that book is definitely written by Allen. [[User:9yz|9yz]] ([[User talk:9yz|talk]]) 09:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC) |
||
== Possible russian propagandist == |
|||
alex jones may be working for the kremlin [[Special:Contributions/2A10:BCC2:2029:6030:30EC:DFD5:B80F:7A69|2A10:BCC2:2029:6030:30EC:DFD5:B80F:7A69]] ([[User talk:2A10:BCC2:2029:6030:30EC:DFD5:B80F:7A69|talk]]) 21:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:13, 23 April 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alex Jones article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, 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. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to COVID-19, broadly construed, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
To view an answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question. Q1: Why is Alex Jones described as a far-right conspiracy theorist?
A1: The preponderance of reliable sources describes him as this.
|
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This page is not a forum for general discussion about Alex Jones. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Alex Jones at the Reference desk. |
Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments, look in the archives, and review the FAQ before commenting. |
Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute. |
There have been attempts to recruit editors of specific viewpoints to this article. If you've come here in response to such recruitment, please review the relevant Wikipedia policy on recruitment of editors, as well as the neutral point of view policy. Disputes on Wikipedia are resolved by consensus, not by majority vote. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) 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. |
This article was nominated for deletion on 10 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep. |
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 level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened: |
Let's review, shall we?
Let's review for our newly-arrived Infowars/Newswars/Prison Planet minions, shall we? Alex Jones claims that the US government kidnaps children and makes them slaves at our martian colony, that kids are only pretending to get shot at school and their parents are only pretending to grieve, that Michelle Obama is really a man, that Carrie Fisher of Star Wars fame was killed to boost DVD sales, that the coming New World Order is a demonic high-tech tyranny formed by satanist elites who are using selective breeding to create a supreme race, that tap water is turning frogs gay, that Coronavirus is a hoax, that 5G networks create Coronavirus within human cells (no explanation about the conflict between those last two), that Temple of Baal arches will be erected in multiple cities around the world Real Soon Now, that the Democratic party runs a pedophile ring through pizza shops, that the US government commits acts of terrorism against its own citizens, that Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are literally demons from hell, that the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami were a government plot, that Obama wanted to detonate a nuclear bomb in Charleston, South Carolina, that FEMA runs concentration camps, that the US is being invaded by South American walruses... Sounds legit to me! --Guy Macon (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- To be entirely correct, the frogs turning gay is (how funny it is) true.
- But not tap water, a type of water with a specific chemical in it.
- https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842049/
- https://niche-canada.org/2020/06/09/chemical-castration-white-genocide-and-male-extinction-in-rhetoric-of-endocrine-disruption/
- https://muse.jhu.edu/article/885705
- https://news.berkeley.edu/2010/03/01/frogs
- Frogs turning gay with a special type of water isn't as far out as you say it to be. (If there is any mention of this in the article I encourage an editor to edit this for misinformation.) 15038623asd (talk) 06:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- You have not read the article then? Slatersteven (talk) 12:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
- I’m sorry, are you implying that “feminization of frogs” is the same as “turning frogs gay”? Smurr7 (talk) 06:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Comments / questions
- Q: Isn't Jones just an actor playing a role without actually believing all of that?
- A: It doesn't matter. Millions of people read his webpage, some believe it, and a tiny percentage go to Wikipedia to set us straight. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Q: Why doesn't this page cover the bit about gay frogs?
- A: We only cover those things Alex Jones says that have significant coverage in reliable sources. --Guy Macon (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
- Which has significant, reliable sources. More like youre cherry picking data to form a narrative. 86.27.243.15 (talk) 09:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- OK, so find some significant, reliable sources that cover this story. Slatersteven (talk) 11:03, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Which has significant, reliable sources. More like youre cherry picking data to form a narrative. 86.27.243.15 (talk) 09:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Q: OK, all that other stuff is just silly, but the bit about South American walruses is real!
But the gay frogs is pretty funny, you have to admit. Guy (help! - typo?) 20:55, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Here it is for anyone who has not experienced this special moment: [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3tVrntKgdN0 ]
- It's like a turd sandwich with Wikipedia's Gay bomb page at the start, The Daily Mail[1] at the end, and Infowars in the middle! --Guy Macon (talk) 21:24, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
- Guy Macon, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvf6gz58xnI Guy (help! - typo?) 21:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
It's not possible to argue that the article is written from a neutral point of view. IndySteve (talk) 09:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
- We go by what RS say. Slatersteven (talk) 11:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Let's review Wikipedia policy, shall we?
The let's review portion of this article is entirely inappropriate and violates the first two lines of the page's header:
- This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Alex Jones article.
- This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
71.74.165.166 (talk) 22:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- It is there because of the huge number of editors who come here to say Alex Jones is real news. We can point to it instead of repeating everything over and over again. O3000, Ret. (talk) 22:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I get that some sort of boilerplate message is warranted - but the tone and verbage seems highly inflammatory and against the manual of style. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- MOS is for articles. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I won't argue semantics. MoS may very well indeed govern articles but WP:TALK definitely discusses what behavior is acceptable and what is not. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 01:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- WP:TALK does indeed discuss that, but I see nothing unacceptable here. You won't find any rule against sarcasm. MrOllie (talk) 01:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Peter Ustinov said: "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." IMO, humor is of great value in difficult articles -- and in difficult situations IRL. Sarcasm is a strong form of humor. But it has its uses. How else do you deal with a constant demand that utter nonsense is real news? Does the section you are referencing contain sarcasm? Yes. But how else can you explain to some folk that that which is promulgated is just beyond what anyone can value as news? O3000, Ret. (talk) 01:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I won't argue semantics. MoS may very well indeed govern articles but WP:TALK definitely discusses what behavior is acceptable and what is not. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 01:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- MOS is for articles. O3000, Ret. (talk) 23:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I get that some sort of boilerplate message is warranted - but the tone and verbage seems highly inflammatory and against the manual of style. 71.74.165.166 (talk) 23:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Seem valid to me. Slatersteven (talk) 11:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Alex Jones Page
It says that Gary Allen wrote "None Dare Call it Treason." I believe this is incorrect. 2600:6C4E:7003:800:E4A6:8C73:655C:4FF2 (talk) 04:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
- Huh? "Treason" isn't used anywhere in the article, but None Dare Call it Conspiracy is, and that book is definitely written by Allen. 9yz (talk) 09:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
Possible russian propagandist
alex jones may be working for the kremlin 2A10:BCC2:2029:6030:30EC:DFD5:B80F:7A69 (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- Biography articles of living people
- C-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in People
- C-Class level-5 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-5 vital articles in People
- C-Class vital articles in People
- C-Class Alternative Views articles
- Top-importance Alternative Views articles
- WikiProject Alternative Views articles
- C-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- C-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- C-Class Texas articles
- Mid-importance Texas articles
- WikiProject Texas articles
- WikiProject United States articles
- C-Class biography articles
- C-Class biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Low-importance biography (arts and entertainment) articles
- Arts and entertainment work group articles
- C-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Mid-importance politics articles
- C-Class American politics articles
- Mid-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- C-Class Libertarianism articles
- Low-importance Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Libertarianism articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- C-Class Skepticism articles
- Mid-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report