Talk:InfoWars
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the InfoWars 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, 2Auto-archiving period: 30 days |
Many of these questions arise frequently on the talk page concerning InfoWars and Alex Jones. To view an explanation of the answer, click the [show] link to the right of the question. Q1: Is this article biased?
A1: Wikipedia follows the consensus view of reliable independent sources. Sometimes, as with InfoWars, the dominant view is negative. Wikipedia avoids false balance and does not accord undue weight to fringe views. Q2: Should the article describe InfoWars as "fake news"?
A2: Yes. There is clear consensus among reliable independent sources that InfoWars routinely publishes entirely fabricated stories, otherwise known as fake news. Q3: Should the article describe InfoWars as far-right or alt-right?
A3: Both. There is clear consensus among reliable independent sources that InfoWars's political stance aligns with the far right and alt-right. Q4: Should the article describe InfoWars as promoting conspiracy theories?
A4: Yes. There is clear consensus among reliable independent sources that InfoWars promotes conspiracies, most notably the false claim that the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting was a false-flag operation. Q5: Does the number of editors who complain about bias on the talk page, or the frequency of complaints, matter?
A5: No. WP:CONSENSUS does not work that way. Please refer to Q1 for more information on the requirements for a post to merit consideration. It should cite reliable sources that contradict the status quo. Single purpose accounts are often recognized as not being here to build the encyclopedia, a valid block reason. Editing is a privilege to work on the project where free speech does not apply. Posts considered to violate policies (including WP:NOTFORUM) may be ignored, collapsed or deleted (WP:TPO). |
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. |
This article was nominated for deletion on August 19, 2006. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
|
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. |
This topic contains controversial issues, some of which have reached a consensus for approach and neutrality, and some of which may be disputed. Before making any potentially controversial changes to the article, please carefully read the discussion-page dialogue to see if the issue has been raised before, and ensure that your edit meets all of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Please also ensure you use an accurate and concise edit summary. |
False equivalence
editWhy doesn’t msnbc have similar descriptions since they have been proven to have pushed fake narrative surrounding trump Russian collusion and false statements related to hunter Biden laptop that has been confirmed by a court of law to be real 172.97.27.250 (talk) 06:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Source? Slatersteven (talk) 08:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Still waiting? Shocking lol also why post about MSNBC on this article? Talk about irrelevant. 32.220.216.27 (talk) 11:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- As am I, source? Slatersteven (talk) 11:17, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Still waiting? Shocking lol also why post about MSNBC on this article? Talk about irrelevant. 32.220.216.27 (talk) 11:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed 2604:3D08:3689:C700:65F5:419E:F36E:347B (talk) 19:18, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not helping. Read the responses above. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:37, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 November 2024
editThis edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
This says Infowars.com is a fake news website and that is 100% false. Do better Wikipedia! Change it please. 2600:6C5C:6BF0:A3F0:D975:3426:F8A:149C (talk) 18:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
- 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. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)