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.
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.
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 articles
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 articles
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.'
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.
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.
"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]
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]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
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.