A fact from International Jewish conspiracy appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 December 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the leaders of Nazi Germany believed that Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin were puppets of an international Jewish conspiracy?
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Jewish history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Jewish history 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.Jewish historyWikipedia:WikiProject Jewish historyTemplate:WikiProject Jewish historyJewish history-related articles
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Article is new enough, long enough, sourced (AGF), neutral, and plagiarism-free. Hook is cited (AGF) and interesting, and a QPQ has been done. Good to go, nice work! and hey, if you ever want a turn on the space laser, i can shoe you in at my next international Jewish conspiracy meeting—i noah guy
theleekycauldron (
talk •
contribs) (
they/she?)
06:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)reply
There's a difference between a
conspiracy and a
conspiracy theory. International Jewry, international Jewish conspiracy theory or world Jewish conspiracy theory or whatever you want to call it is a conspiracy theory and not a conspiracy. The title of the article should reflect that fact. Describing it as just a 'conspiracy' is wrong, it is a conspiracy theory.
Abdul Akter (
talk)
01:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)reply
That’s not how article titles are decided, however. Please review
WP:AT and consider the number of reliable sources using either of the proposed titles (Google Scholar for example) then whether the extra word is necessary to distinguish from other topics (
t ·
c) buidhe03:10, 10 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Now that I'm home I did the search and can tell you:
1750 results for "international Jewish conspiracy" on Google Scholar, but only
12 for "international Jewish conspiracy theory". Wikipedia articles are titled after what the topic is commonly called in sources. (
t ·
c) buidhe04:49, 10 February 2023 (UTC)reply
I have reverted your move. Once you moved it and someone {Buidhe) moved it back, your moving it again was edit warring (technically, "move warring"). Please do not move it again until you have filed a formal move request and have a consensus for the move.
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
23:37, 25 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't constitute that as enough to be edit warring. But I apologize, I was under the assumption it was okay to move given the previous talk page on the subject. But I'll refrain from moving till there is a more formal move request
LoomCreek (
talk)
00:03, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
result: Not moved. Assessment of consensus below includes that of the community in Wikipedia policy, specifically verifiability. Please remember that the arguments determine the outcome, not the numbers. Thanks and kudos to editors for your input; everyone
stay healthy!P.I. Ellsworth ,
ed.put'er there11:17, 4 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The problem with the title "International Jewish Conspiracy" is it implies that a real conspiracy exists and that there's a secret group plotting, which there isn't.
Oppose The NGRAM results
[1] and Google Scholar
1,800 for "International Jewish conspiracy",
23 for "International Jewish conspiracy theory" make it clear that the proposed name sees hardly any use. We should not make up an article title and substitute it for the one used in reliable sources. Anyone who reads the first sentence of the article cannot miss that this conspiracy does not exist. The proposed title also fails
WP:Concise and
WP:Precise. (
t ·
c) buidhe00:56, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Per the sources. "International Jewish conspiracy theory" is not a well-used phrase, as opposed to "International Jewish conspiracy". It has been the name of the article since it was created by Buidhe on 2 December 2021.
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
02:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
I agree with the change. When I saw these page moves, I was about to revert the ones moving it back to Conspiracy because, as I read it, this title does imply that a conspiract exists. Conspiracy theory, while it might be used less, demonstrates that it is not true. We all know that many readers don't read very far into an article and might just read the artice title and scan the lead section. LizRead!Talk!04:18, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Support "Conspiracy theory" is quite a different meaning "conspiracy", and is certainly a commonly used phrase. Current title is quite ambiguous and a bit jarring. And unreflective of its content. This article is not about international Jewish conspiracies, whether true or not. It is about conspiracy theories. It is consistent with other related articles, e.g.
Zionist Occupation Government conspiracy theory,
Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory,
Jewish war conspiracy theory, etc. Leaving this simply at "conspiracy" would be anomalous. I am not finding examples of articles about conspiracy theories that are titled "conspiracy" alone. Seems like a straightforward move.
Walrasiad (
talk)
09:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Somehow when it comes to conspiracy theories the article titles policy often flies out the window. For example, the Judeo-Masonic conspiracy and Zionist Occupation Government articles should be renamed that because it's by far the
WP:COMMONNAME and
WP:CONCISE. Nevertheless, there are still plenty of conspiracy articles at a title that refers to a nonexistent phenomenon, i.e.
Great Replacement (
t ·
c) buidhe15:36, 26 May 2023 (UTC)reply
@BuidheComment I definitely understand the inclination. My main contention is that in the example you gave 'conspiracy' isn't in the title.
My main issue is how conspiracy can be misinterpreted as the political/historical term that refers to actual events that happened (which this isn't obviously) like the contra affair.
So it's clearer in that example you gave it's just referring to the term for something completely made up and nonexistent, i.e a conspiracy theory.
LoomCreek (
talk)
00:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Just to add: What I've observed in many RfCs, RMs, etc, is that directly after the initial statement, the proposer adds their !vote, followed by "as proposer", as in "Support - as proposer" - or "as nominee" in XfDs, etc. But even without this, unless the proposer has made a statement indicating otherwise - such as "doing this for the sake of formality" - it is assumed that the proposer supports the proposition being considered.
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
23:28, 28 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I disagree that the current title somehow implies the truth of the premise. We have lots of articles on conspiracy theories and hoaxes, they don't need to have the fact that they're crazy and false be part of the title, that can be in the lede and the first sentence.
Eurabia,
Sony timer,
Andinia Plan, etc. don't need to include "conspiracy theory" in the title.
SnowFire (
talk)
02:11, 27 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Strong Support—the title clearly implies the existence of this "conspiracy". This is a baseless conspiracy theory, and it should be clearly labeled as such. 〜
Festucalex •
talk09:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Support – existing title fails
WP:V, as there is no such conspiracy. Even the oppose votes above refer to this as a theory. –
bradv12:10, 31 May 2023 (UTC)reply
Oppose. There is no such a conspiracy theory named "International Jewish". There is an "International Jewish conspiracy" conspiracy theory. The proposed name would not be correct in my opinion. Similar to the
Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory, which has a misleading name because it is actually an anti-Judeo-Masonic conspiracy theory, so it should be renamed.
Vpab15 (
talk)
10:19, 3 June 2023 (UTC)reply
That is indeed the most obvious point. People believe, erroneously, that there exists an "International Jewish conspiracy", which belief might rightfully, if repetitively, be called, a belief in an "'International Jewish conspiracy' conspiracy theory". That name, although correct, would obviously be pretty silly, whereas the current name, which denotes the thing being believed, is entirely appropriate.
Beyond My Ken (
talk)
00:11, 4 June 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.
In what way do my edits misrepresent the cited sources? I quite literally just paraphrased what is already written. The lead sentence is a mess right now and needs to be rewritten. The term should be introduced with a definition; there's no point in claiming the theory is widespread if the reader doesn't know what it is.
Loytra (
talk)
00:34, 15 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Source doesn't say that the "exact details" vary, but the content of the theory varies. I'm not dead set on any particular wording but you do have to check the sources before changing the meaning. (
t ·
c) buidhe06:38, 15 August 2023 (UTC)reply
Alright, that's fair. Would it work better if I changed "exact details" to "content"? The first two sentences would then read as such:
The international Jewish conspiracy or world Jewish conspiracy is a
conspiracy theory that typically claims a malevolent, global
Jewish circle, referred to as International Jewry, conspires for
world domination. It has been described as "the most widespread and durable conspiracy theory of the twentieth century" and "one of the most widespread and long-running conspiracy theories" overall, something that has been credited to the large amount of variance in the theory's content.
Loytra (
talk)
03:03, 16 August 2023 (UTC)reply