Talk:New World Order conspiracy theory: Difference between revisions
Bougatsa42 (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 12:00, 01 January 2020 (UTC) --> |
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 12:00, 01 January 2020 (UTC) --> |
||
[[New World Order (conspiracy theory)]] is |
[[New World Order (conspiracy theory)]] is an article that is being improved by supporters of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Rational Skepticism|WikiProject Rational Skepticism]], which seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1575346/Lies-damn-lies-and-counterknowledge.html counterknowledge]. Therefore, although remaining neutral, this article will be written from a [[scientific skepticism|rational skeptical]] perspective. Like its name suggests, this article isn't about “new world order” as a paradigm shift in international relations (if you are interested in that subject, I suggest you read and possibly edit the [[new world order (politics)]] article instead). It's about ''conspiracy theories'' about a “New World Order”. By “[[conspiracy theory]]”, we mean any “a belief which explains an event as the result of a secret plot by exceptionally powerful and cunning conspirators to achieve a malevolent end”. Conspiracy theories are viewed with [[scientific skepticism|skepticism]] because they contrast with [[institutional analysis]] of historical or current events, and are rarely supported by conclusive evidence. |
||
Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view]] gets misinterpreted to mean neutral to all sides of an issue. In actuality, we only represent viewpoints published by [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable sources]] and in proportion to the number of reliable sources that express this view. If the majority of reliable sources on a topic are critically positive or negative, then Wikipedia should accurately reflect this viewpoint. Furthermore, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]], not truth — what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. |
Wikipedia's policy on [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view]] gets misinterpreted to mean neutral to all sides of an issue. In actuality, we only represent viewpoints published by [[Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources|reliable sources]] and in proportion to the number of reliable sources that express this view. If the majority of reliable sources on a topic are critically positive or negative, then Wikipedia should accurately reflect this viewpoint. Furthermore, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]], not truth — what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true. |
Revision as of 08:12, 28 March 2018
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New World Order conspiracy theory 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
![]() | 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. |
![]() | Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. |
![]() | New World Order conspiracy theory 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. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Good article |
![]() | This article 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.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New World Order conspiracy theory 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: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 30 days ![]() |
To become a Featured Article
New World Order (conspiracy theory) is an article that is being improved by supporters of WikiProject Rational Skepticism, which seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with counterknowledge. Therefore, although remaining neutral, this article will be written from a rational skeptical perspective. Like its name suggests, this article isn't about “new world order” as a paradigm shift in international relations (if you are interested in that subject, I suggest you read and possibly edit the new world order (politics) article instead). It's about conspiracy theories about a “New World Order”. By “conspiracy theory”, we mean any “a belief which explains an event as the result of a secret plot by exceptionally powerful and cunning conspirators to achieve a malevolent end”. Conspiracy theories are viewed with skepticism because they contrast with institutional analysis of historical or current events, and are rarely supported by conclusive evidence.
Wikipedia's policy on neutral point of view gets misinterpreted to mean neutral to all sides of an issue. In actuality, we only represent viewpoints published by reliable sources and in proportion to the number of reliable sources that express this view. If the majority of reliable sources on a topic are critically positive or negative, then Wikipedia should accurately reflect this viewpoint. Furthermore, the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth — what counts is whether readers can verify that material added to Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source, not whether editors think it is true.
That being said, in order for the article to be chosen by the Wikipedia community to become a feature article, I am interested in collaborating with anyone who has created a user account well-written, comprehensive, factually accurate, neutral and stable enough to meet featured article criteria. Creating a user account is extremely useful for an editor (such as giving him or her the ability to more easily watch over pages he or she is interested in) but it also contributes to a culture of relative accountability on Wikipedia. Lastly, as this article gets closer to becoming a featured article, it will most probably become a target for vandalism by anonymous cranks so an administrator will have to semi-protect it to prevent them from editing it, which means even good anonymous editors won't be able to edit it either. --Loremaster (talk) 01:16, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
In the first paragraph "ideology" is spelled incorrectly. 50.75.197.19 (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
External links
From the Wikipedia:External links guidelines page:
Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia, but they should not normally be used in the body of an article. They must conform to certain formatting restrictions. Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to its accuracy.
Some external links are welcome, but it is not Wikipedia's purpose to include a comprehensive list of external links related to each topic. No page should be linked from a Wikipedia article unless its inclusion is justifiable.
What should be linked
- Wikipedia articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the subject's official site, if any. The official site should typically be listed first.
- An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply.
- Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.
--Loremaster (talk) 18:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
Internal links
I have restored the internal links to articles which deal with the various subsections of this article in more detail. No reason, valid or otherwise, has been given for removing these links. Edward321 (talk) 14:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- template {{main}} is not appropriate in this context. That template is used when the section is an exact WP:SUMMARY of the main article. These sections instead deal (or should deal) only with the topic in relation to NWO. In these cases, it is instead appropriate to simply link to the topic within the first sentence of the section. -Verdatum (talk) 16:12, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
- I agree with Verdatum which is the reason I have and will continue to remove these internal links. --Loremaster (talk) 21:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Literature
I have done some research on literature on the topic lately. Even though I have not yet read all these texts, I though I might just suggest them for review and possibly inclusion into the article. Also, I think it would be a good idea to have a list of scientific literature about this topic as well, not only primary sources by conspiracists.
- Parish, Jane (ed.): The Age of Anxiety. Conspiracy Theory and the Human Sciences, Oxford 2001.
- In this book: Alasdair Spark: "Conjuring Order: the new world order and conspiracy theories of globalization", 46-62, Nigel James: "Militias, the Patriot movement, and the internet: the ideology of conspiracism."
- West, Harry G & Sanders, Todd (eds.): Transparency and Conspiracy. Ethnographies of Suspicion in the New World Order, Durham and London 2003.
- In this book: West and Sanders: "Introduction", 1-37, Daniel Hellinger: "Paranoia, Conspiracy, and Hegemony in American Politics", 204-232, Susie Harding and Kathleen Stewart: "Anxieties of Influence: Conspiracy Theory and Therapeutic Culture in Millenial America", 258-286, Jean Comarof and John Comaroff: "Transparent Fictions; or, The Conspiracies of a Liberal Imagination: An Afterword", 287-300.
The may also be bits on NWO in
- Fenster, Mark: Conspiracy Theory. Secrecy and Power in American Culture, Minneapolis 2008,
as well as in
- Goldberg, Robert Alan: Enemy Within. The Culture of Conspiracy in Modern America, New Haven, London 2001.
Chapters 5 and 6 of Rupert, Mark: Ideologies of Globalization. Contending visions of a New World Order, London, New York 2000, may give hints towards the spread of conspiracism.
There also are an entries on the New World order in Landes, Richard A (ed.): Encyclopedia of Millennialism and Millenial Movements, London, New York 2000 and in Knight, Peter: Conspiracy Theories in American History. An Encyclopedia, Santa Barbara, Denver, Oxford 2003.
I thought I'd just put that up here. As soon as I get to read these in depth, I hope to be able to contribute. Maybe others take an interest in some of these texts. If they are not always suited for this article, I guess they are still relevant for adjacent ones, like conspiracism, for example. 78.55.218.66 (talk) 06:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you User:78.55.218.66. Those are very good sources. If you intend on contributing directly to the article at some point, I suggest you create a user account since it is extremely useful for an editor (such as giving him the ability to more easily watch over pages he is interested in) but it also contributes to a culture of accountability on Wikipedia. Despite the fact you will probably use a pseudonym, it's easier for other editors to discern your motivations when a track record of contributions is attached to your user account. Lastly, as this article gets closer to becoming a featured article, it will most probably become a target for vandalism by cranks so an administrator will have to put a semi-protection on it which will prevent them as well as good anonymous contributors such yourself from editing it. So seriously think about it. --Loremaster (talk) 15:28, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 7 December 2016
![]() | This edit request to New World Order (theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
4.31.10.254 (talk) 19:12, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
How is it a "Conspiracy Theory" when you can watch the Media say it?
The media continues to say (just like today on Fox news), a "New World Order might be approaching"
Here are 3 articles today: 1. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-new-world-order/2017/01/01/fc54c3e6-ce9d-11e6-a747-d03044780a02_story.html
2. http://www.euronews.com/2017/02/02/orban-waits-to-be-on-right-side-of-new-world-order
3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jerry-jasinowski/scary-new-world-order_b_14334856.html
It's OBVIOUSLY not a "conspiracy theory". That credit would go to CIA document 1035-960 which proves that the CIA made up the term:
https://projectunspeakable.com/conspiracy-theory-invention-of-cia/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.173.64.8 (talk) 00:29, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
- There's this thing called the future and this other thing called the past. They're in opposite directions on this thing called time. Opposite means "not the same, as far away from the same as possible." Things in the past happened before now. Things in the future have not happened yet. Those may be very hard concepts for you, but you need to understand the difference in order to get what's going on here.
- The news articles you cite discuss the possibility of future changes ("new") to how things work ("order") in the world. They are not claiming that there was, has been, or still is an existing secret society that controls the world.
- In other words, your claims that those articles prove the existence of the New World Order mentioned in conspiracy theories is like claiming that the possibility of a nanotech Grey goo proves Paracelsus's legendary alkahest can be found in every hardware store on the planet; or that still nascent Genetic engineering technology proves that the mythical Minotaur is as well documented a historical figure as Abraham Lincoln. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
- (edit conflict)There is no "it" here; that's a "them.". That is, the different sources are using the words in subtly different ways from each other, and in vastly different ways from the conspiracy theory. As nations', states', corporations' and political movement's fortunes change, the way the world runs changes with them in response. That's a simple fact. On the other hand, the changes are not necessarily driven by a single linked set of shadowy forces acting in concert; that's a conspiracy theory. Anmccaff (talk) 01:04, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on New World Order (conspiracy theory). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090805093622/http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/externalisation/contents.html to http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/externalisation/contents.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325113304/http://w2.eff.org/Privacy/TIA/20031003_comments.php to http://w2.eff.org/Privacy/TIA/20031003_comments.php
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807131645/http://www2.pslweb.org/site/News2/2021559999?page=NewsArticle&id=14431&news_iv_ctrl=1261 to http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2/2021559999?page=NewsArticle&id=14431&news_iv_ctrl=1261
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:58, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Totally Bias And Partial.
Wall Street, The Federal Reserve, and the Warburg Family needs to be addressed.Paul Warburg, in order to be on the board of the Fed left Wells Fargo and Jacob Schiff replaced him.This is a bias and partisan article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:5B0:51CB:7B38:910E:A082:9C63:33DB (talk) 15:11, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
This whole article reads like a conspiracy theory about right-wing conspiracy theories. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.69.234.225 (talk) 09:13, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New World Order (conspiracy theory). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130310080017/http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3075 to http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3075
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on New World Order (conspiracy theory). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091212030333/http://watch.pair.com/merovingian.html to http://watch.pair.com/merovingian.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 20 February 2018
![]() | This edit request to New World Order (conspiracy theory) has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Universalpublicauthority (talk) 17:34, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
I want to add the NWO Freedom Fighter details. of Dr. Vinay Kumar Verma as fallow. People silhouettes on globe, earth globe spinning on a maple level, and he created the path and dared to do something for the globe. Earth something innovative in the global platform for the India and for the universe, by selective, & quite impossible to definite possible certainties. No doubt he will be known as a unique view details and outstanding individual in the world. As the hr accounting, whit new theories will be invented by his highness, he is the founder of the VCSSGOC start up and worker of SANSARCHAAYA, Universal Peace Beggar Society, Universal Peace Force, VCSSGOC UNIVERSAL RECOMMENDATION COMMITTEE he is the thinker of CUIIAIFRFTL and CUIICRAPL. He is also the thinker of Recommendation Committee. He is working on 3800 books each translated version more than 100 languages including audio and video books. 11000 research papers, and also 125000 renowned articles on village to global issues parallel. His highness is the chief editor at core India finance & international finance and, economic and auditing journal. Chief editor of the times of united states of India and the universe times etc. And He is handling various assignments in the field of restructuring & rehabilitation of companies, takeover, mergers & acquisitions and business and brand valuation. He has specialized in the fields of accounting & audit, financial & management consulting, business valuations, mergers & acquisitions and business advisory services. And years of leadership experience in government spanning revenue via VCS-SGOC business project development and VCS-SGOC research work voluntarily, law and order via legal library web support system, development work, rural infrastructure, finance, housing & urban development, industries, municipal affairs and relief at VCS-SGOC in a open platform manner. He is associated with the development of cost & management information systems for more than 150 companies ( in implied/expressed manner ) covering more than 45 industries. In addition, he is closely associated with turning around of many large Corporate, focusing on systems improvement with cost reduction approach. He is closely involved with several national level financial institutions. Recommendations of the committee are well received / accepted, being implemented by the concerned agencies. He will be/ is associated with more than 28 high level committees as chairman / member both at national & state level at VCS-SGOC. Restructuring committee of state level PSUS, expert committee on co-op. Credit institutions, fiscal reforms implementation committee at VCS-SGOC. He will be/is also associated with the development of cost accounting record rules for many industries as a future member of informal advisory committee, determent Of corporate affairs, Government Of India. His efforts in the furtherance of costing & management accounting profession in India were recognized by the institute of cost & works accountants of India (ICWAI), ICAI, ICSI. ________________________________________
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 17:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Wikipedia good articles
- Social sciences and society good articles
- Old requests for peer review
- GA-Class Skepticism articles
- High-importance Skepticism articles
- WikiProject Skepticism articles
- GA-Class Alternative Views articles
- Top-importance Alternative Views articles
- WikiProject Alternative Views articles
- GA-Class politics articles
- High-importance politics articles
- GA-Class American politics articles
- Low-importance American politics articles
- American politics task force articles
- WikiProject Politics articles
- GA-Class sociology articles
- Mid-importance sociology articles
- GA-Class organization articles
- High-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- GA-Class International relations articles
- Mid-importance International relations articles
- WikiProject International relations articles