Talk:David Icke

Substantial following

I've deleted again the claim in the lead that he has gained a substantial following across the political spectrum. This at best requires a citation. If someone wants to revert this, can they please show any information at all showing that he has a 'substantial' - a significant minority at least - of support across the political spectrum in the UK. Making lots of speeches at small venues does not equate to this claim. --Speedevil (talk) 11:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed; plus, the word "substantial" is extremely vague. Is 100 followers "substantial"? 1,000? 1 million? Even if you can find an article that says the word "substantial," I think we need to quantify this to some extent. (And, just because someone buys your book and/or comes to hear you speak, that doesn't make the person a follower. I would possibly go hear him speak only because I think he's amusing, but I certainly wouldn't do so because I think he has anything substantive to say.)JoelWhy (talk) 13:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

The source for that is here, p 3, so I'm going to restore it in some form, though I may tweak the wording. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:52, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

This is a self-published source.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-published_sources - See also http://independent.academia.edu/IagoPontloroy/Papers/1580784/The_lack_of_following_of_David_Icke - which clearly explains that he's not got a following, as he's a Smurf that lives in a pineapple under the sea. (For clarity, I should point out that I am the author of this, and it is fiction. I have no personal knowledge of where Mr Icke lives)

Reverted once more. --Speedevil (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

It isn't self-published; it's an academic article. [1] I added the self-published link only as a courtesy link so people without access to the academic database could read it. Please read the footnote, and stop removing it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes, Slim is correct, this is an academic article. And, the authors are clearly not Icke-followers.JoelWhy (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I've removed "substantial," so that part of the sentence now reads: "... and has attracted a global following that cuts across the political spectrum." I think that's a pretty fair summary of the authors' description of him on page 3 of the courtesy link [2] (I don't know the page number in the journal [3]). SlimVirgin ^(talk) 20:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Football

The football picture says "probably for Hereford", but I don't think so. The player to the left in the all pale kit is from Coventry, for whom I note Icke played as a Youth. I suspect this is either a Youth, reserves, or possibly testimonial game when he was at Coventry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.59.222 (talk) 15:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Is this article a joke?

Mr. Icke is widely held to be a somewhat mentally challenged crackpot, and yet almost nothing in the article presents this view. On the contrary, he is given as much credibility as anyone with normal understanding of the world not based on a sort of self-constructed science fiction.

Or has he wielded a mysterious power and put Wikipedia in thrall to a higher alien force? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.209.171 (talk) 15:13, 28 April 2012 (UTC) This man sounds a rambling idiot, why would anyone give him a forum? We do that too often in our society. Give platforms to maniacs