Talk:Mark Dice

}

}

small edit war

I edited a section under "Mark Dice" which stated, "...and professes conspiratorial beliefs about the Roman Catholic Church.." because there wasn't a citation. Since then a citation was added. But the external link is bad. I don't know of Mark Dice speaking out against Roman Catholicism but his forte' is in mainly other areas. Even if he made 'a' comment about the Catholic Church harboring pedophiles, is that enough to use in a basic description of Mark Dice? IMO I don't think so. InfoFlow 05:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Newsworthy?

I don't understand why one would say John Conner is not newsworthy, he's been on Fox several times, he's been on the view, he's huge on youtube. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deb4ser (talk • contribs) 01:46, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

because he is a wacko...idiot! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.136.37.36 (talk • contribs) 23:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

So is Mark Dice. 209.134.115.5 (talk) 06:32, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

9 11

Changed "9/11 truth movement" to "his theories on 9/11." Dice's theory regarding 9/11 has NOT been established as truth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.41.23.114 (talk • contribs) 12:11, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Pseudonym

perhapse someone should make a page for Mark Dice or forward the John Conner search to the Mark Dice page now that he isn't using the pseudonym. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.15.1 (talk • contribs) 19:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, did he take the name from terminator, or what? It seems so. 71.246.241.195 (talk) 13:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Deletion

OK, first off, this article has an assertion of notability, so it's not eligible for speedy. That said, I'm skeptical of the notability and/or truthfulness of this article. I can find no reliable sources for this person's existence: only MySpace, YouTube and personal webistes. Can anyone show me that this person has really been on Fox? I found no mention of him in the sources given. Heimstern Läufer 05:13, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

This article may be subject for speedy as the recreation of a previously deleted article on John Conner. In fact, it's been deleted a couple of times I think. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 05:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Does he exist? Reliable Sources for John Conner (real name Mark Dice) MARK DICE IN THE NEWS

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uN2rl2yK_kw O'Reilly Factor [youtube]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb9Moy15EBY ABC's The View [youtube]

http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/483865p-407205c.html New York Daily News

http://entertainment.myway.com/celebgossip/pgsix/id/06_30_2005_8.html the NYPOST

http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/_/id/7471582/moby?pageid=rs.Home&pageregion=single1&rnd=1121372452031&has-player=true&version=6.0.12.1212 Rollingstone

http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0632,halter,74115,20.html The Village Voice

http://www.mehrnews.ir/en/NewsDetail.aspx?NewsID=413722 Tehran Times in Iran

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7992114920283511318&q=john+conner+coast+to+coast Coast to Coast AM [googlevideo]

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/cover032205.htm Canada Free Press

http://headlines.agapepress.org/archive/3/292005f.asp Agape Press

http://www.washtimes.com/entertainment/20050703-101111-4616r_page2.htm Washington Times

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/article/ds22222.html Digital Spy in the UK

http://smartmoney.com/life/index.cfm?story=20050729-tech Smart Money

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/news/comments/?entryid=213062 Rotten Tomatoes

http://entertainment.iafrica.com/news/457017.htm iAfrica in South Africa

http://www.heise.de/tp/r4/artikel/19/19466/1.html Telopolis in Germany

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_8-7-2005_pg9_9 Pakistan Daily Times

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.15.1 (talk • contribs) 00:14-00:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Existing is not the point. Lots of people exist, are quoted in newspapers or have web sites. That doesn't necessarily make them notable. -- Subsolar (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Name Change from Connor to Dice

Uh. . .I am curious to know why he changed his alias. And who has confirmed that his real name is Mark Dice? I could just ask him on myspace, but he doesn't really talk to people on myspace. I guess i'll just have to call into his show and risk looking like a dumbass. But i'm curious to know who went in the Wiki article and changed all the "John Connor"s to "Mark Dice"s. I think perhaps it was the man himself. ToxicArtichoke 08:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

There was a statement on MarkDice.com which points to TheResistanceManifesto.co explaining that he was sick of being called John and refering to himself as john since it was a pseudonym presumably taken from the terminator character. All his videos on youtube use the name mark dice also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.185.188 (talk • contribs) 05:46-05:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Words cannot express how happy I am that this wacko finally changed his name. My name really is "John Conner", and if all of the Terminator jokes/references/remarks for the past twenty years weren't bad enough, I have recently been identified with this remarkably twisted idividual. Maybe I can do something productive with my life, and the name "John Conner" won't go down in history as belonging to another conspiracy theorist nut case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.165.71 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

It could be worse... there are women named Sarah Connor listed in the L.A. phone book! 70.15.116.59 (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I am fairly sure Dice is not his real last name. I'm almost sure Mark is. I remember when he announced the change from Connor to Dice. It was on the Alex Jones show, he said, "My real name is Mark Diceshewski (or something along those lines), but you can call me Mark Dice." I do not think "Mark Dice" is as much as a pseudonym as it is a shortening of his real name. --Zimbabweed 11:18, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

His real name is **Mark Shouldice**, not Mark Dice, just FYI. He was working before publishing [advanced memory concepts](http://web.archive.org/web/20001022122351/http://www.advancedmemoryconcepts.com/AboutMark.htm), and a dating book. This can all be verified at the [County Clerk's website](http://arcc.co.san-diego.ca.us/arcc/services/fbn/search.aspx), do a search for Shouldice. Evan Carroll (talk) 15:44, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Neutrality issue in video section

I think i fixed the neutrality issue in the video section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MagicMemory (talk • contribs) 03:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Famous for being famous

This guy is famous, but not notable. Delete it, please! Bearian 00:49, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The current form of the article is reasonable, after User:Athaenara and others put some work into it. If the article remained stable for a while I think it's OK to keep it. The guy does have press coverage, and we usually defer to what the press has thought important enough to cover. This is not a comment on Mark Dice's world-historical importance. We do have other articles on other things that are strange, jokey and self-promotional. A short well-referenced article that has been purged of advertising language is easier to put up with a long, boastful one.

The COI noticeboard entry on this article was marked Resolved on 4 September. (The pointer to the noticeboard will open the correct entry if you turn off Javascript). EdJohnston 15:19, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Famous and notable

Who ever flagged this article for lack of "notability" did so for personal reasons. there are countless articles on wikipedia that cover individuals or topics which are extremely less notable than Mark Dice. Dice has gotten more mainstream media coverage than almost all others in the 9/11 truth movement. only Alex Jones and Loose Change creators have topped his news coverage.

Dice is an extremely successfull culture jammer, and his culture jams have been covered around the world. He is rising to the status of other great culture jammers such as Banksy and the Yes Men. Again, those who appose this article likely do so for personal reasons. Likely a difference of political or religious views of Dice. Or maybe they are Mormon who seem to hate Dice for his views on the subject. or right wingers who hate anyone who is in the truth movement. and by the way, Dice is a right winger, so don't call him a liberal because he dissagrees with the war and with Bush. 14 June 2007 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.187.241 (talk • contribs) 23:39-23:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC) and 00:32, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

To some extent I think you are correct, Dice has become notable as a culture jammer. That should be the focus of this article. He is less notable for his ideas, so we needn't cover those in depth. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, nor is it another venue for culture jamming. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow any idiot or whacko can get an entry in wikipedia. This guy should be in an asylum not wikipedia. I never heard of him before today, so my dislike isn't personal. I oppose all whackos.70.91.213.234 (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

He is certainly noteworthy now: http://www.infowars.com/?p=2683 Forgot to add citation to main article - could someone add it correctly for me because I keep doing it wrong :(Auto98uk (talk) 14:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Infowars is a blog - we don't use blogs as sources, except aboutt hemselves. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 19:32, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

How does a story like this get on here then - it definitely happened because the audio is on youtube, which we can't use, and all the mainstream media is ignoring it, so there aren't any "reliable" sources, despite it provably happening Auto98uk (talk) 08:27, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Many, many things happen in this world, but we don't expect to read about all of them in an encyclopedia. If I posted a video of me getting on a bus that would be verifiable, but it wouldn't be noteworthy or "encyclopedic". We use reliable sources as the filter to tell us what's notable and verifiable. If the mainstream media and all other reliable sources (like scholars, etc) ignore the incident then it probably isn't important enough for an encyclopedia. While Wikipedia allows for fast updating, it's still an encyclopedia. It shouldn't be the first to report anything. And it certainly shouldn't drive the news by making something more notable than it otherwise would be. So to answer your question: get this reported in a reliable source. That could mean calling up reporters and getting them interested. My guess is that this will end up being reported somewhere in the next day or two, and then its notability will have been established. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 09:12, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but (admittedly IMO) the adopted son of an ex-USA President telling people to kill him is surely the sort of thing that would be in a persons entry in an encyclopaedia? Isn't not allowing it until it is reported by the media a bit risky - in some cases things simply aren't reported on because...actually that isn't a discussion for here i suppose Auto98uk (talk) 15:29, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

TheResistanceManifesto.com

Why is "TheResistanceManifesto.com = a thoroughly commercial website requiring paypal"? How can the man have an article when we can not reference his own site as a External link? He does use paypal, but it hardly seems to be "required". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Harpakhrad11 (talk • contribs) 06:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure I follow you. Regardless, unless it's used as a source, a link isn't a reference. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 06:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't mean to use the site as a reference. My confusion is this in the editing someone states:

MarkDice.com = TheResistanceManifesto.com = a thoroughly commercial website requiring paypal, etc. See WP:EL.

I don't really understand why it is there. Harpakhrad11 07:17, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Suggested deletion

I suggest that the FAIR-sourced statement in the article be deleted per this inasmuch as FAIR should not be used for contentious statements in BLPs.--Epeefleche (talk) 03:21, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Fundamentalist individual?

Hi everyone,

I see that this article is part of Category:Christian fundamentalism. Are there any references that say he is a Christian fundamentalist?

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm... No reply to my question.

I'll assume he is not a Christian fundamentalist.

--Kevinkor2 (talk) 20:42, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Education?

There are a few things I think would improve this Mark Dice page. First, where is he from and what is his educational background? Those are basic things we need to know about this author on this page. Second, a new section needs to be added about Mark Dice's instability in dealing with radio commentator Alex Jones' recently removing his book for sale on his website. In early October, 2012 Dice has gone on a raving attack of Jones with a multi part video series without disclosing the motivation for his sudden change of heart. Dice relied heavily on exposure provided to him in Jones documentary films and affiliated Jones network members including We Are Change without whom he would literally be unknown.

Other information that would be helpful about Mark Dice is whether or not he's married with or without children. We need more information on people who come out of no where writing books on secret societies. I personally see no reason to entrust Mark Dice with being any relevant source of information. He seems very punkish and immature to be handling the Jones' issue the way he is. Brainchannels (talk) 03:29, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

married? i had just ASSUMED he was gay.

was paul lynde married? charles nelson riley? vincent price?

yeah, yeah, "reliable sources", but.... 67.150.80.243 (talk) 10:03, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Deletion

Looking at this article it is clear that there are no reliable sources and there is no need for this article to exist. The picture looks like it was taken on a webcam and I suspect that Mark Dice was the one that wrote this article in the first place. I would like to begin the deletion process as this article is not appropriate for an encyclopedia under the general notability guidlines. (KingHiggins (talk) 20:29, 14 November 2012 (UTC))

"literally", literally

should something be mentioned about his speech habit of using "literally" literally 3 times in every sentence?! literally.

for someone who blames ke$ha for the fall of western civilization, he sure does TALK like her! 67.150.80.243 (talk) 10:10, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Mark Allen Shouldice

His name according to his published works is Mark Dice. Leave it alone or find a reliable source that says otherwise. Jsharpminor (talk) 19:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. We do not use primary source documents such as county assessor filings for such facts in a biography of a living person. WP:Secondary sources are required. Note that I, personally, have no doubt of the truth of the connection, but Wikipedia's policies are tougher. Binksternet (talk) 19:49, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

While one might not doubt it, I have spent some time researching and all I can find are primary sources or hearsay. Thus it cannot, yet, form a part of this article. It seems an unusual family name. It most definitely needs reliable sources. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:00, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Last November Dougweller and I discussed the primary sources on my talk page, and among all the various sources we found nothing that qualifies as secondary and reliable. Binksternet (talk) 20:20, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I was going to say the same thing. It would be nice to find sources that meet our criteria as this does seem to be correct, but until we find these we can't make the change. Dougweller (talk) 20:41, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

What is this, a war of attrition? Fictitious Business Names are not a proper reference. I smell socks. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I have the perfect solution.

Wikipedia Biography Subject 3275921, controversially known as either Mark Dice or Mark Allen Shouldice, is an American author, conspiracy theorist, and Wikipedia editor. Jsharpminor (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

"right wing"?

"right wing" is the primary adjective phrase used to describe this subject without a cite. I've read the article and did not see supporting information for this claim - perhaps the opposite because he had an issue with Glen Beck. I do not think that being anti-"Illuminati" automatically makes someone support a reduction of tariffs or oppose an increase to the capital gains tax. Unless someone can produce a reference to his voting record in congress or a scan of his Republican membership card that phrase should be removed. Silly. --Hutcher (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

His book "The Resistance Manifesto" is clearly right wing in that its themes are mostly biblical, warning to resist the rise of the Antichrist. He also apparently sometimes pretends to be a ludicrously extreme liberal in order to prove a right wing point of view about liberal gullibility. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpHOaW99ST4 for evidence. It's clear that he's really right wing, but we ought to find some citable source that says so directly. Rod (A. Smith) 00:45, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

regular...what does that mean?

dice is characterized in this article as regularly appearing on coast to coast. what frequency translates into "regular"? or how would this be substantiated? i ask because i think it overstates the case. he may have appeared several times on coast to coast, but to say regular conveys something else, which i suspect would not bear scrutiny. similarly, coast to coast does have conspiracy theorists as guests, but unless you lump ufos and ghosts and supernatural and a host of other topics together under that heading, i'd suggest that it's misleading to call it a conspiracy theory show. so better language probably could be found that acknowledges not only the fact that coast to coast does host conspiracy theorists, but also the fact that this is one of a variety of topics. in other words, this is not an exclusive or primary focus as is implied by the present language. -- chris — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.97.132.246 (talk) 11:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

The editors of wikipedia are full of shit

i added three relevant pieces of information to this page, with a reference, the fact that: 1. this guy was born with a different last name 2. is a christian 3. is a conservative

and these reverted back. i'm not giving any more money to wikipedia if i can't even enhance articles with useful, reference cited information.