Jump to content

Talk:Conspiracy Theory (film)/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

No directors commentary

This movie has no directors commentary on any DVD version in any country. That should be removed from the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.65.111.129 (talk) 21:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

No capitalization

(Movie) should not be capitalized. --dan

moved. --mav

This is a bit of a pet peeve of mine, but isnt it a poor idea to distinguish a film and an idea by capitalisation? The movie ought to be Conspiracy theory (movie). --William M. Connolley 16:08, 2004 Mar 11 (UTC)

Fluoride

However, his rant about fluoride in the water has, over the years, been increasingly echoed by doctors and scientists as a health risk, particularly to children.

The sitation following this statement is a pretty poor one. If there's any evidence that the above is the case, e.g. a survey from a scientific periodical, it should be linked to; otherwise the statement and current link should be removed.

Controversy?

Why is the opening contraversial? as it is most of that information looks more suited to the trivia segment. 81.152.196.46 13:51, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

  • I was just wondering why conspiracy theory goes straight to here. Isn't the topic that the movie is based on more relevant than the movie? If I knew how to make it the lead article I would.
I agree, but I also don't know how to make the idea the primary redirect. --Lexein 10:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Synopsis

  • Lack of Synopsis section will keep this article from getting to Good Article status. I don't have a copy of the film. Remember, Wikipedia does include spoilers. Anyone? --Lexein 10:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Working on itFriendly Person (talk) 02:11, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
    • OK, I wrote a plot synopsis, but it's pretty long. Then I realized that a synopsis had actually been put in already. I merged mine in, I think it's better now, more complete; but if someone can compress it by about 50% that would be good.--Friendly Person (talk) 03:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
      • OK, I just added to it while smoothing over a few rough points. I'll try to condense over the next few days.

Ed8r (talk) 22:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Warning

Trivia

Fair use rationale for Image:Conspiracy theory poster.jpg

Image:Conspiracy theory poster.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Earthquake in Turkey

In the film, there was an earthquake in Turkey... See also 1999 İzmit earthquake Böri (talk) 08:26, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

So what's point exactly? --Loremaster (talk) 20:52, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
From this article: "Jerry tells her that NASA is trying to kill the President using a secret weapon on the Space Shuttle that can trigger earthquakes." This film is from 1997, İzmit Earthquake happened in 1999. Böri (talk) 09:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
Since those are two obviously unrelated facts, what's your point exactly? I seriously hope you are not suggesting that NASA used a secret weapon to trigger the 1999 İzmit Earthquake in the real world?!? Because such an insane suggestion should deserve anyone a one-way ticket to Arkham Asylum. ;)
That being said, if you are only suggesting that it is a tragic coincidence, you would still need to find a reliable source that says exactly that to mention it in this article. --Loremaster (talk) 19:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
In the real world, there are weapons like that... Böri (talk) 09:15, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
*sigh* Although I know trying to reason with a paranoid conspiracy theorist is a waste of time, I will say this: Even if it were true that such secret weapons exist in the real world, it doesn't automatically mean that one was used in Turkey (an Arab country which is an ally of the United States in the Middle East by the way). But let's just say for argument's sake that one was used to cause the 1999 İzmit earthquake, you still need to find a reliable source that explicitly claims that 1) the U.S. government used such a weapon to cause this earthquake, and 2) that, in a strange coincidence, the film Conspiracy Theory mentioned such a possibility. Do you understand, Böri? --Loremaster (talk) 14:38, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
  1. Turkey is NOT an Arab country.
  2. You can't find a reliable source about it
  3. Who made that film? (an American film, isn't it?)
  4. and what about Indonesia earthquake(2004 Indian Ocean earthquake)? What about 2010 Haiti earthquake?
Böri (talk) 08:17, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
  1. You are right that Turkey is not an Arab country but it is an ally of the United States and Israel so it makes NO SENSE for Americans or Israelis to use an earthquake-triggering weapon on Turkey.
  2. Of course there is no reliable source to support my mistake, which is of no importance to my main argument.
  3. Conspiracy Theory is an American film. So what?!?
  4. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that all the earthquakes you mentioned were triggered by some secret weapon. So I ask you again: Please provide reliable sources for your paranoid claims or shut up because this talk page is only for discussing improvements to the Conspiracy Theory (film) article.
--Loremaster (talk) 16:11, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
No need to be angry, Loremaster. I agree that without reliable sourcing to indicate any real possibility of article improvement, the discussion should be discontinued. Erik (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
  1. First of all I'm not a paranoid!
  2. "Turkey (an Arab country)" : That's a RACIST comment!
  3. Reliable source? You find it, if you want
  4. article improvement: You can write about the earthquake in Turkey in the film... :::::::#"(Turkey)is an ally of the United States and Israel" You think so! Most of the people of Turkey don't like these countries...How many people died in Iraq? Who killed them? Who killed Yitzhak Rabin?
  5. Conspiracy Theory is an American film. So what?!? : They knew what would happen
  6. "such an insane suggestion should deserve anyone a one-way ticket to Arkham Asylum." The ones who made that weapon deserve it! :)
  7. "the discussion should be discontinued" : Because you don't want to listen these things...
  8. You can say: This is not a forum...etc. I can show you hundreds of examples on "talk page" that are not about the article improvement
Böri (talk) 08:52, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
  1. Böri, even if it was proven that you are not clinically paranoid, you're definitely not making any rational sense.
  2. I seriously though that Turkey was an Arab country. There was absolutely nothing racist about the comment! I didn't mean anything positive or negative by using the word "Arab". I was simply stating what I thought was a fact but I was clearly mistaken. I could have just as easily used the word "Middle Eastern" but I didn't.
  3. Since I already explained to you that I made a honest mistake, there is no need for me look for a reliable source, is there? That being said, if you want to edit any Wikipedia article to add some information, you have to be the one provide us with reliable sources. That's a basic rule of Wikipedia.
  4. Although it is trivial information, you are right that we could mention that the earthquake mentioned in the film was in Turkey. However, I hope you understand why we cannot mention the 1999 İzmit earthquake in the article.
  5. Please explain to how you know Richard Donner, the producer and director of the film Conspiracy Theory, knew in advance that the U.S. government would use a secret weapon to trigger 1999 İzmit earthquake. Can you point to a single interview where Donner confirms this speculation of yours?
  6. Beyond paranoid conspiracy-theory websites, do you have any reliable source that you offer to support the notion that a secret earthquake-triggering weapon has been made and used?
  7. User:Erik is the one who said this discussion should be discontinued. Not me. As you can see, I'm willing to debate you until you see reason.
  8. I'm sure you can find hundreds of examples on talk pages that are not about the article improvement. I can too. However, my point obviously is that these are all examples of what people should NOT be doing according to Wikipedia guidelines.
--Loremaster (talk) 15:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Loremaster wrote: Since I already explained to you that I made a honest mistake, there is no need for me look for a reliable source, is there? That being said, if you want to edit any Wikipedia article to add some information, you have to be the one provide us with reliable sources. That's a basic rule of Wikipedia.

Of course, it was NOT about your "mistake"... I mean: Find a reliable source about the earthquake-weapon! "They" will say: "Yes, come and see... We made an earthquake-weapon!" :) How can you find such a source? Central Intelligence Agency made these films... Böri (talk) 11:11, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Putting aside the fact that it would obviously be incredibly STUPID for the CIA to make a Hollywood film in order to reveal to the world the existence of their secret weapon, conspiracy theorists assume that illegal plans to change the government or assassinate people can be kept secret for long periods of time, but all evidence shows that secret groups or plans in the United States are uncovered by civil liberties groups, infiltrated by reporters or government officials, and written about in the press. Even secrets about wars and CIA operations — Vietnam, the Contras, the rationales for Bush's invasion of Iraq in 2003 — are soon exposed for everyone to see. That's how we know about some (but not all) of the CIA's dirty tricks after all! So until you can point to an article/essay/report/book by a credible whistleblower, journalist or scholar who presents evidence that the U.S. government has developed and used an earthquake-weapon, you cannot mention your speculation in a Wikipedia article and probably shouldn't even be indulging in this kind of speculation to begin with. In other words, get a life, Böri. This discussion is over. --Loremaster (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
"They" did many things that the most of the people in the World didn't understand... So with Hollywood films, "they" showed some of them. "They" know that the people will not understand the message of these films... :) Böri (talk) 11:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
You're wasting our time with your delusions. So stop it and move on or will get reported to a Wikipedia administrator. The End. --Loremaster (talk) 18:19, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Some conspiracy websites and some Venezuelan and Russian media have reportedly blamed HAARP as a cause of the 2010 Haiti earthquake. from High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program Böri (talk) 12:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
2010 Haiti earthquake conspiracy theories. So what's your point? Conspiracy websites have no credibility and obviously are not reliable sources. Venezuelan and Russian media are widely known for reporting unfounded conspiracy theories especially if they have an anti-American dimension. Regardless, what you still seem not to underdstand is that even if it was proven that the 2010 Haiti earthquake was caused by some secret weapon of the U.S. government, this is not revelant to the Conspiracy Theory (film) article until someone writes an article that connects this film to the earthquake. Do you understand? If not, get lost. --Loremaster (talk) 16:22, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
this is not revelant to the Conspiracy Theory (film) article You know that that's not true... This film was about the earthquake-weapon! Böri (talk) 09:07, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Böri, this silly debate is over. If you insists on continuing it, I will report you to a Wikipedia administrator and you will be either reprimanded or temparily banned from Wikipedia. Do we understand each other? --Loremaster (talk) 17:54, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Conspiracy_Theory_(film)/Archive_1&oldid=340759271"