Talk:Fringe theory

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fringe theory article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Fringe theory was nominated as a Philosophy and religion good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 4, 2015). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

This article was nominated for deletion on 24 September 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Philosophy: Science Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Philosophy of science

Skepticism Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative views Top‑importance

	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
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Wahrmund, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on January 13, 2015.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Pseudo-scholarship

I removed [[:Category:Pseudo-scholarship]] as inappropriate. Pseudo-scholarship (PS) is fringe theory (FT), but FT is not necessarily PS. Likewise, Swedish language is inappropriate as a member of [[:Category:Finland Swedish]]. Okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Solomonfromfinland (talk • contribs) 29 January 2014

The article about "Fring theory" is a theory fabrication

I looked through all my lexicons of philosophy of science/epistemology today and found that there is no explicit article about fring theory, even not mentioned. The sources in the article are also relatively thin. There are just two articles on it in Google Scholar and four articel in Google Books. What is in the article - is probably mostly theory fabrication. Each sentence should be supported by reliable sources, otherwise delete - because theory findung of authors.--Empiricus-sextus (talk) 10:04, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Fringe science

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge, as finge science is a notable subset of fringe theory, but large enough to warrant separate discussion. Klbrain (talk) 13:05, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is the difference between those terms? I think there is none, and as synonyms, they should be merged. This was discussed 10 years ago in Talk:Fringe_theory/Archive_1#Fringe_science_vs_fringe_theory, where I see an emerging consensus to merge (but there was no vote and the discussion got sidetracked). As for the direction of the merge, Google test shows 860k hits for fringe theory, and 800k for fringe science, so I'd suggest to merge the science article into the theory one (name-wise). Ping participants of that old discussion: @POVbrigand, Aarghdvaark, and Blueboar: _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC) Ps. Content-wise, this (theory) article attempts to define theory as a wider term then science ("Fringe theories include the models and proposals of fringe science, as well as similar ideas in other areas of scholarship, such as the humanities" - unreferenced claim from lead, and from the body, "Although often used in the context of fringe science, fringe theories have been discussed in fields of scholarship, such as Biblical criticism,[4] history,[5][6] finance,[7] law,[8] medicine,[9][10] and politics.[11]" - but I don't see any source supporting not caling fields of history or medicine 'science'.", and the word scholarship (primary meaning: financial aid...) is used here in a rather weird fashion that IMHO is synonymous to science anyway. As for the fringe science article, it simply doesn't mention the term fringe theory outside the see also... So frankly, this entire split seems to be a fringe theory :P --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking back at that old discussion, the question was whether to merge this article (Fringe theory) into the article on Fringe science. That idea was rejected. The consensus was that while “Fringe science” is a common and concerning sub-topic of “Fringe Theory”, there are other forms of “Fringe theories” that have nothing to do with “science” (pseudo-history, fringe theology, and conspiracy theories were examples).

If I read this proposal correctly, the idea now is to merge in the other direction… to merge our Fringe science article into this broader article.

I am hesitant. While fringe science is a sub-topic within the broader topic of fringe theory, I think it has enough unique features that it merits its own sub-article. The two articles should definitely be linked, but each has a somewhat different scope. Blueboar (talk) 12:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Blueboar I'd be happy to withdraw this idea if we had a single RS that draws a distinction between these topics. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:56, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, on the grounds that these are distinct topics warranting separate coverage. The arguments about political and theological fringe theories are convincing; fringe science is sufficiently notable to warrant a separate page. Klbrain (talk) 06:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose As pointed out above, fringe science is one chunk of fringe theory, but there are many fringe theories that are not in the realm of science. Libcub (talk) 01:07, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There are various sources that discuss fringe theories in the context of conspiracy theories; for examples, scroll through GBooks for reliable (and unreliable) sources. -Location (talk) 21:30, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

differentiation from hate speech

It is missing a section on how fringe theories can be contributors to hate speech and can cause harm. This section would require research of a very sordid kind as I am not familiar with all kinds of racist or misogynist theories. We establish that fringe theories exist outside of the mainstream, but don't go into enough how they exist without the mainstream. Drocj (talk) 06:57, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]