Talk:Conspiracy theory

Technopedia Center

Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science
S1 Informatics S1 Information Systems S1 Information Technology S1 Computer Engineering S1 Electrical Engineering S1 Civil Engineering

faculty of Economics and Business
S1 Management S1 Accountancy

Faculty of Letters and Educational Sciences
S1 English literature S1 English language education S1 Mathematics education S1 Sports Education

Talk:Conspiracy theory - Wikipedia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Conspiracy theory 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 Wikipedia? 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, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22: 3 months

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.

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 Wikipedia. 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.

Alternative views Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia'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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Paul Krugman (8 May 2006). "Who's crazy now?". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 27 August 2019. A conspiracy theory, says Wikipedia, 'attempts to explain the cause of an event as a secret, and often deceptive, plot by a covert alliance.'
Sean Illing (11 April 2019). "The Trump-Ukraine story shows the power of conspiracy theories: This book explains why conspiracism is on the rise in American politics". Vox.com. Archived from the original on 1 October 2019. Retrieved 1 October 2019. Nancy Rosenblum: That's right, and I'm so glad you said that, because Wikipedia actually defines a conspiracy theory as a false threat of a conspiracy, and that's not true.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Knuteson (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (special:diff/927825243)

This article was selected as the article for improvement on 9 September 2013 for a period of one week.

Section sizes

Section size for Conspiracy theory (39 sections)
Section name	Byte count	Section total
(Top)	21,966	21,966
Origin and usage	7,099	9,838
Alleged CIA origins	2,739	2,739
Difference from conspiracy	4,509	4,509
Examples	1,179	1,179
Popularity	8,792	8,792
Types	1,107	4,112
Walker's five kinds	929	929
Barkun's three types	1,279	1,279
Rothbard: shallow vs. deep	797	797
Lack of evidence	6,935	6,935
Rhetoric	6,115	6,115
Consequences	8,742	8,742
Interventions	73	23,052
Target audience	2,042	7,709
General public	2,458	2,458
Conspiracy theorists	3,209	3,209
Reducing transmission	1,805	1,805
Government policies	4,648	4,648
Public health campaigns	4,543	4,543
Backfire effects	4,274	4,274
Psychology	8,967	28,091
Attractions	10,374	10,374
Causes	4,674	8,750
Projection	2,214	2,214
Physiology	1,862	1,862
Sociology	3,411	6,128
Influence of critical theory	1,192	1,192
Fusion paranoia	1,525	1,525
Viability	4,138	4,138
Terminology	1,972	1,972
Politics	3,455	19,128
Arab world	2,982	2,982
Turkey	4,616	4,616
United States	8,075	8,075
See also	853	853
References	84	84
Further reading	7,844	7,844
External links	542	542
Total	164,020	164,020

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q:Are conspiracy theories inherently false?

A:A key feature of conspiracy theories is that they are unfalsifiable, in the sense that they rely on circular reasoning and thus resist any attempt to assess their veracity. At best one can say that conspiracy theories are, by definition, not even wrong. This kind of hair-splitting misses the point, however. Conspiracy theories are not descriptions of real events. If they were, they would be called conspiracies.

Wiki education assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 27 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): DET313205 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Emjo2000, Samath1a, SethBruder, MCaro99, Amonroyr, Pmmuab77.

Edit request

"A conspiracy theory is distinct from a conspiracy; it refers to a hypothesized conspiracy with specific characteristics..." This should say "it is", "not it refers to". A conspiracy does not "refer" to a conspiracy; it is one. Or at least it needs some kind of rephrasing. 2A00:23C5:FE1C:3701:B179:C8D1:FF57:859 (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree, it makes sense. Slatersteven (talk) 10:36, 12 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A conspiracy does not "refer" to a conspiracy; it is one. But a conspiracy theory refers to a conspiracy. And that is what the sentence says. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:33, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add A Fact: "Scientific literacy combats conspiracy theories"

I found a fact that might belong in this article. See the quote below

Brief scientific literacy interventions, especially those that focus on critical thinking skills, may help to undermine conspiracy beliefs and behaviors before the conspiracy theories have a chance to take root, according to a team led by Penn State researchers.

The fact comes from the following source:

https://spotlightmagazine.ca/2024/12/02/brief-scientific-literacy-interventions-may-quash-new-conspiracy-theories/

Here is a wikitext snippet to use as a reference:

 {{Cite web |title=Brief scientific literacy interventions may quash new conspiracy theories |url=https://spotlightmagazine.ca/2024/12/02/brief-scientific-literacy-interventions-may-quash-new-conspiracy-theories/ |website=Spotlight Magazine |date=2024-12-02 |access-date=2024-12-02 |language=en-US |first= |last=Phys.org |quote=Brief scientific literacy interventions, especially those that focus on critical thinking skills, may help to undermine conspiracy beliefs and behaviors before the conspiracy theories have a chance to take root, according to a team led by Penn State researchers.}}

This post was generated using the Add A Fact browser extension.

Oceanflynn (talk) 22:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Conspiracism" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Conspiracism to this article has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 8 § Conspiracism until a consensus is reached. 67.209.128.24 (talk) 17:12, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Categories:

Hidden category:

All Wikipedia vital articles