weight in more general discussions of the topic. Shortcut WP:PROFRINGEWP:PROFRINGE Proponents of fringe theories seek to use Wikipedia as a forum for promoting...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per WP:PROFRINGE. I am not suggesting that the article's author intended to promote this...

User:DavidPickett/Userboxes/911 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​ Per WP:PROFRINGE and WP:UBCR - this userbox indicates support of a conspiracy theory. ~delta...

the 6 references are by the inventor of the term, Ref. 5 is likely WP:PROFRINGE and may fail WP:SYNTH, and Ref. 6 is another Wikipedia article (Zaum)...

Auto-generated every hour. Editor interaction utility Duplicate posting of PROFRINGE and self promotional material originally posted on Dorothy Kilgallen....

thing, let alone one warranting an entire article. See the similarly WP:PROFRINGE Luso–Danish expedition to North America AFD for similar discussions, but...

not supported by current science; appears to be WP:OR Delete: It's WP:PROFRINGE , not valid science, google search comes up with nothing. ThePlatypusofDoom...

very unreliable sites mostly linked to Reiki and as such this fails WP:PROFRINGE. Not material for an encyclopedia. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:50, 2 November...

Subject fails GNG, ORG and NPOV. It's also a pretty glaring example of PROFRINGE. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:NORG, I...

WP:PROFRINGE. Similarly, a reliable source might publish an article about this topic or write a book about this topic without being WP:PROFRINGE. You...

standards. As it stands it is little more than a PROFRINGE essay. The article currently fails WP:V, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:UNDUE. Even if RS sources are found...

Pseudo-scientific crap and medical quackery backed by fringe sources. Fails WP:PROFRINGE. See also WP:Complete bollocks. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:27, 17 November...

would even be possible to rewrite the article to comply with DUE and PROFRINGE due to the dearth of coverage by mainstream sources. The bottom line is...

some way.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:47, 16 August 2016 (UTC) Delete WP:PROFRINGE, WP:SYNTH. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2016 (UTC) The above discussion...

if they were on the same playing field effectively comes down to a WP:PROFRINGE position, which is seriously problematic. And then of course there's still...

appears to pass WP:NPROF#C1. In this situation (where the article is WP:PROFRINGE but passes notability), I think we're supposed to keep the article and...

noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:GNG-failing articles report for further context. scope_creepTalk...

WP:FRINGE stuff... Perhaps this is a case of WP:NOTADVOCATE mixed with WP:PROFRINGE? Whatever the case, it fails WP:GNG. Ceosad (talk) 23:59, 13 November...

rings the notability bell. The article also has more than a whiff of WP:PROFRINGE about it. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:11, 13 August 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate...

noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:GNG-failing articles report for further context. scope_creepTalk...

(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:PROFRINGE article that consists solely of a WP:SYNTH of anecdotes and urban legends...

(UTC) Delete. Coverage isn't significant; whatwe've got is confected & WP:PROFRINGE. Alexbrn (talk) 08:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Comment: As a professor...

Supporter (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​ Clear violation of WP:PROFRINGE, in that it’s promoting the dangerous conspiracy theory that the 2020...

rings the notability bell. This appears to be a fairly glaring case of WP:PROFRINGE and WP:SPAM Ad Orientem (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. See also...

itself isn't believed to have enough demonstrate to evidence. Clearly WP:PROFRINGE, lost of weasel-y language and the topic itself fails WP:GNG. Most of...

from the keep !votes. They largely ignored the issues involving DUE, and PROFRINGE while their interpretation of GNG seemed shockingly liberal to me. If...

Subject is utterly non-notable. Article is little more than a piece of PROFRINGE SPAM. Sources fail RS. A Google yielded nothing but promotional hits....

non-notable (there's no exemption for fringe labels like "cryptids") and profringe, with no evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources independent...

March 2015 (UTC) Delete. That's not really original reasearch, rather WP:PROFRINGE: giving undue weight to ideas with few and non-influential promoters,...

non-notable (there's no exemption for fringe labels like "cryptids") and profringe, with essentially no significant content or reliable sources since its...

Fails WP:FRINGE, WP:NPOV and WP:V. It's an almost completely unsourced WP:PROFRINGE essay that, assuming the subject is notable (not a given), would have...

talk|contribs|COI 13:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC) Delete Article appears to be a massive PROFRINGE PROMO piece. As noted by the nom it is also a CONTENTFORK. It violates...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:SYN, WP:PROFRINGE, lack of WP:MEDRS and (in particular) excessive reliance on studies conducted...

— Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC) Keep Passes WP:PROFRINGE - everything sourced to RS (Washington Post, New York Times, CNBC, etc...

Cryptozoology#Lack_of_critical_media_coverage). In short, it's all WP:PROFRINGE/all WP:RS fails. :bloodofox: (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2020 (UTC) Bloodofox...

2020 (UTC) ​This article needs some serious work to be compliant with WP:PROFRINGE, but I do see enough high-quality sources to meet the general notability...

is that simple and obvious." This should be deleted per WP:NOT and WP:PROFRINGE. Full disclosure, I saw this user page mentioned on wikipediocracy, however...

instructor's own page: User talk:Sdeyrup. I think that this is a violation of WP:PROFRINGE and WP:ADVOCACY. The easiest thing may be to ask them to work at a different...

"Multiverse (religion)". Under "Spiritualistic research" it becomes WP:PROFRINGE. In actuality, the multiverse is really only discussed in reliable sources...

Delete In its current form it clearly violates both WP:NFRINGE and WP:PROFRINGE. The article does not appear to meet the standards for coverage in GNG...

for some time, it at least needs some secondary sources to not be WP:PROFRINGE. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 16:16, 8 May 2018 (UTC) Relisted to generate...

article around that probably need to be AfDd. Fails GNG and inherently PROFRINGE. Warrenmck (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Delete. As per everyone...

it appears to be self-promotion. The same user included borderline WP:PROFRINGE content (if the programme was notable in itself, and it was sourced, describing...

personal draft space or its original location; the title needs to reflect WP:PROFRINGE if it is kept in main space. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Seriously WP:PROFRINGE, full of synthesis ("oh, look, Hitler killed gay men, that means he thought...

report Auto-generated every hour. New user, first edit is to restore profringe edits by Johnbannan. Since Johnbannan is currently blocked, this would...

the promulgators and promoters per Wikipedia:FRINGE#Notability and WP:PROFRINGE ("The notability of a fringe theory must be judged by statements from...

mentioning fringe ideas in a stub article without violating WP:UNDUE and/or WP:PROFRINGE. As for the "museum", it is apparently promotional: "Consisting of a small...

thank you. - HyperGaruda (talk) 09:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC) Delete WP:PROFRINGE says: "Proponents of fringe theories have in the past used Wikipedia as...

worded very carefully in order to comply with WP:FRINGE and particularly PROFRINGE. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC) Natch. Alexbrn (talk)...

for Doctors and Virusmyth.com are clearly fringe, The Cornell Review is profringe piece by "a sophomore in the College of Engineering" in an independent...

used in a conspiracy theory. Not only an invalid redirect but also WP:PROFRINGE. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 04:16, 25 November 2015 (UTC) That it is used...

sources are simply promoting the organization (and so we have to keep WP:PROFRINGE in mind). Some of these items are blatantly promoting the organization...

somehow caused the suicides of Duggan and Kronberg violate Wikipedia:PROFRINGE? Waalkes (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2014 (UTC) If you are a named party, please...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This seems to be a WP:PROFRINGE WP:POVFORK of Unidentified flying object, with little or no redeeming...

WP:N bell. Subject fails WP:BIO and the article fails WP:V as well as WP:PROFRINGE. An examination of the previous AfD left me profoundly unimpressed with...

deletion/James Woodward (physicist) and I came over here to find a WP:PROFRINGE and WP:NOTCV promotional article for an academic that I do not see passing...

like a WP:PROFRINGE article created by the main proponent and socks. jps (talk) 18:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC) Delete: not notable and WP:PROFRINGE. This can...

recieved substantial coverage in mainstream sources. Delete votes reflect WP:PROFRINGE advocacy attempting to give WP:FALSEBALANCE as a volation of WP:NPOV....

including the claim without indicating that it's false is potentially WP:PROFRINGE. How do we deal with this situation? Should we just remove the claim,...

was noticed that this article is written like a PR and has flimsy, WP:PROFRINGE sources. Upon analysis of the sources, there was at most one usable item...

noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:GNG-failing articles report for further context. scope_creepTalk...

at all. "References" from places like AIG violate WP:SECONDARY and WP:PROFRINGE. The topic of creationism is notable, which is why we have the article...

place artifacts" exists beyond the armchair speculations of vaguely WP:PROFRINGE factions? jps (talk) 06:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC) Keep. I see it more...

are mistaken as to what WP:PROFRINGE covers. PROFRINGE is not a proscription on fringe, weird, or bizarre ideas; PROFRINGE is a proscription on fringe...

from dutch wiki, which was originally written by a now globally blocked PROFRINGE user and contains numerous sourcing/POV issues. It was taken to Wikipedia:Articles...

Dorothy Kilgallen. (A handful of others have also been involved in the WP:PROFRINGE pushing there.) The latter issue in particular has been the subject of...

talk:Apaugasma#Reflections and response, but I guess "profringe" is not quite the right word. On top of that, profringe editors never apologize, so, definitely not...

on multiple pages", and one (IMHO) major component is the persistent PROFRINGE disruption by multiple SPAs (and sockpuppets - see the SPI's previously...

included it for context). [83] Personal attack--allegation that I am a 'profringe' editor. [84] Implication that my view is not 'worth anything at all'...

another side in the form of arbitrary categories as this is a form of WP:PROFRINGE. Clearly the troublesome editor in question knows ALL this and is angling...

conspiracy theories, and about denialism than you, profringe editor, ever will. You are not fooling anyone, profringe editor." [228] (after being asked to tone...

the concept outside of that single source and veers dangerously into WP:PROFRINGE territory with the WP:OR links to fringe theory language families like...

article.".[12] WP:PROXYING Loosmark, fails verification: [13][14] WP:PROFRINGE/WP:UNDUE - op-eds in right-wing media/blog by far-right activist/historian:...

reliable for scientific claims. As for the CNET piece, it is lovlingly PROFRINGE. As for RSP, the last discussion on the reliability of CNET was 6 years...

Wikipedia shortcut promoting a fringe theory (per WP:PROFRINGE). The essay can stay but we shouldn't amplify it this way. Guy (help!...

deleted. The remaining sources are all WP:MEDPRIMARY and possibly WP:PROFRINGE, and some of them are not about hydrogen administered in aqueous solution...

April 2026 (UTC) And the issue people see is if all the sources are WP:PROFRINGE it isn't possible to write an article compliant article with our policies...

discussions. Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:22, 18 June 2021 (UTC) Delete WP:PROFRINGE nonsense with serious BLP issues. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:43, 18 June...

Delete In its current form it clearly violates both WP:NFRINGE and WP:PROFRINGE. Discussimg or referencing patently Fringe and Psuedoscientific subjects...

others in intelligence. I reverted these edits because they violate WP:PROFRINGE and WP:UNDUE. The claims of genetic differences in intelligence between...

" Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: Comments: Profringe edit warring. MrOllie (talk) 12:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC) Mr. Ollie...

Ecclesiastes." 06:22, 24 November 2020 (UTC) "/* November 2020 */ WP:PROFRINGE" Diffs of attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page: 06:15, 24 November...

reason for deletion. -- Ϫ 15:06, 29 August 2016 (UTC) According to WP:PROFRINGE, WP:NFRINGE, WP:BLPFRINGE what a person does is absolutely relevant because...

are all entities from folklore — the cryptozoology coat of paint is WP:PROFRINGE — and we already have the extremely dubious list of cryptids with no criteria...

well as other notable figures in Christian history Their tendentious WP:PROFRINGE editing and WP:IDHT behavior in this discussion is enough for me. -Ad...

this diatribe. It sounds very similar to the same-old/same-old from WP:PROFRINGE editors. Whether you intend this or not, that's the tradition to which...

by a fringe author that got a lot of attention in fringe sources. WP:PROFRINGE applies here and there's very little evidence that this book is of significance...

Noticeboard. IMO this is a case of an editor engaged in rather aggressive WP:PROFRINGE editing on an article and subject that is a frequent target for the promotion...

bleach for COVID are dangerous nonsense. What we often see is when WP:PROFRINGE editors don't like an idea being attacked they WP:CRYBLP and elide the...

would present it as if it were of equal validity. The addition was WP:PROFRINGE and subject to WP:BRD and WP:WAR. --Hob Gadling (talk) 17:44, 20 September...

August 2016 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 86.186.73.141 (talk): Ignore the WP:PROFRINGE editor, please. (TW)" 12:57, 6 August 2016 (UTC) "Reverted 1 edit by 86...

"Yes indeed. The problem here is that we seem to have some WP:PROFRINGE types, and possible socks,[13] who have a POV and are casting around to...

attempt to resolve dispute on article talk page Not needed. Ordinary WP:PROFRINGE edits. Tgeorgescu (talk) 15:56, 3 November 2019 (UTC) Comments: Also WP:DUCK...

between two users with a preferred version of the page which violates WP:PROFRINGE. Simonm223 (talk) 17:55, 8 January 2019 (UTC) Simonm23 should be WP:BOOMERANGed...

of the articles being biased for the WP:PSCI policy, i.e. these are WP:PROFRINGE edits. In 2022, both accounts have provided fairly long summaries for...

(talk) 20:17, 13 August 2018 (UTC) I'd also like to point out that it's WP:PROFRINGE to call this stuff "paranormal". This isn't a term academics use to refer...

(UTC) Lsparrish has an extensive history of attempting to edit-war WP:PROFRINGE edits into the article, and long-winded and tendentious justification...

— Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:06, 16 August 2016 (UTC) Keep Passes WP:PROFRINGE - everything sourced to RS (Washington Post, New York Times, CNBC, etc...

is clear that this is alternative medicine at least. According to WP:PROFRINGE, our goal in seeking to establish notability is to look for independent...

these days though. 24rhhtr7 (talk) 05:34, 18 March 2022 (UTC) Per WP:PROFRINGE and WP:NOTHERE, an editor absolutely can and should be removed if their...

being attacked with warnings. 2. See your labelling of my edit as WP:PROFRINGE in your edit summary.[278] 3. If anything is controversial, then it is...

(edit conflict)I could just as well make a big post about the OP's WP:PROFRINGE and WP:SEALION behaviour. Or instead, I could just point out that they...

come back to my talk page. I have smarter things to do than deal with PROFRINGE harassement and disruption (which involves mostly other editors). RandomCanadian...

people who are against pseudoscience. On the other hand, there are some profringe editors who are able to stay longer because they can stop themselves at...

relevant PAGS (so yes, we do treat anti-quackery groups differently from WP:PROFRINGE ones; that's one of Wikipedia's best features). It's just GSoW seems to...

category of the paranormal. How is this not a distinct violation of WP:PROFRINGE? How should we go about reigning this in? :bloodofox: (talk) 23:41, 13...

action is to copy/paste the essay upon talk pages of users who push WP:PROFRINGE POVs. But Nvtuil's particular manner of pushing such POV does remind me...

Despite their protestations to the contrary, the individual is clearly profringe and should probably be topic banned. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:47, 20 April...

Conspiracy theories about the killing of Seth Rich could not pass WP:PROFRINGE at this point, and Rich's WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE status (see WP:LPI) and family's...

nonsense, based on the same rehashed evidence. To me, it's the latest WP:PROFRINGE editing game in a long line of same. This time, the media is still caught...

books and views he's known for is neither biomedical information nor WP:PROFRINGE. And again please look to the sources, not the current or former state...

[260]. Such accusations show WP:BATTLEGROUND mentality and push a WP:PROFRINGE POV. And, oh, that old tired creationist canard about Pasteur and abiogenesis...

who genuinely want WP to report on this as conspiracy theorists and WP:PROFRINGE. Great. Feynstein (talk) 20:09, 24 February 2021 (UTC) But scientists...

article to support your argument.[167] Ironically, you engaged in WP:PROFRINGE while at the same time complaining about it. When confronted with this...

regard for the fact that my edits were directed against WP:HOAX and WP:PROFRINGE content, penalizing me for my inability to weaponize AE as effectively...

from fringe theory. This would raise obvious problems in the form of WP:PROFRINGE and also CIR. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:00, 16 September 2016 (UTC) I am...

really, Van Bladel himself has been refuted. [381] It's a kind of WP:PROFRINGE really. It's exhausting. Mustering up all the good faith I can, I'd say...

sources - could do with a severe hair cut. I'd support blocking the WP:PROFRINGE IPs (and/or semi-protecting the article) so that there's a chance to assert...

Untrammeled has been indeffed by Kinu. They may appeal through the normal process. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) (non-admin closure) The following...

post the diffs. I have never done so. If you meant my explaining the WP:PROFRINGE policy and explaining the general community consensus on fringe articles...

to put this discussion outside the boundaries of WP:EXPERT suggest WP:PROFRINGE may be a more apropos policy here. Simonm223 (talk) 18:47, 6 September...

what we often do - and demanding rigorous application of WP:FRINGE, WP:PROFRINGE and WP:RS. There are other editors who put a lot of effort into building...

theories" (source: Slavic Review) merits very close scrutiny from a WP:PROFRINGE perspective Adding - Icebreaker transfers responsibility for World War...

Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:14, 19 March 2017 (UTC) Support. Probrooks == WP:PROFRINGE. A topic ban would be for the good of the Project. Alexbrn (talk) 14:06...

editing history or restrictions. My AFD nomination was based solely on WP:PROFRINGE. I take no position on this debate. Brianga (talk) 20:44, 12 August 2016...

articles, and these editors commonly rewrite articles to meet WP:RS and WP:PROFRINGE. Check out, for example, this gem—before: (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index...

a textbook case of WP:NOTHERE for WP:NOTFORUM, WP:BLP reasons and WP:PROFRINGE reasons. Specifically the account exists primarily to make antisemitic...

12 February 2015 (UTC) Add-on to clarify that my edits conformed to WP:PROFRINGE, WP:BLP#Balance per my interpretation of policy. Steeletrap and other...

this is a subject you’re passionate about, but you have advocated for PROFRINGE material to be included, rather vociferously, though you did indeed drop...

you really should strike-out – now you are dressing up a content/rs/profringe issue, and trying to pass it off as a civility issue. You say I have "deployed...

and should be stopped. And ThesariusQ is still continuing to push WP:PROFRINGE views about socionics at Talk:Socionics and Wikipedia:Fringe...

--In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 20:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC) Every WP:PROFRINGE POV-pusher argues that they are right and the Wikipedia is wrong, starting...

we've had plenty of miscreants: puppets, attack dogs, trolls and WP:PROFRINGE obsessives, who have needed to be blocked or banned. What's doubly incredible...

your point? Apokrif (talk) 19:43, 25 September 2017 (UTC) Delete. WP:PROFRINGE / just fucking stupid. Wikipedia is a reality-based Project. Alexbrn (talk)...

"advancing positions some users dislike" - that is a strawman. This is WP:PROFRINGE editing. Shibbolethink listed examples of it. Of course, this particular...

and understanding the issues (bttom of diff). After discussion about PROFRINGE, DUE WIEGHT, and NOTNEWS with another editor (see above in next diff)...

Roxy the dog. bark 18:22, 21 December 2016 (UTC) Pile on Delete per PROFRINGE and NPOV. As just about everyone has noted it's a POV content fork intended...

few AfDs, and address the issue head on that we should still avoid WP:PROFRINGE while still recognizing this is clearly notable, even if the sourcing...

(talk) 17:16, 19 June 2021 (UTC) Delete, obviously. That essay is WP:PROFRINGE crap, based on pseudoscientific reasoning, and does not deserve a WP link...

result is "profringe editor". I am being very generous here. --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:20, 6 April 2020 (UTC) Another thing: Read WP:PROFRINGE. The vast...

article being a WP:PROFRINGE source that should not be linked to on Wikipedia. 174.239.49.103 (talk) 06:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC) PROFRINGE is about mainspace...

Instead Wikipedia provides unwarranted promotion for the "concept" (WP:PROFRINGE). In contrast to "Flying ace" or simply "ace" where there are independent...

highly biased, reactionary viewpoint, and I think it's veering into WP:PROFRINGE territory. I've essentially given up on editing sexuality articles, as...

List of Shakespeare authorship candidates), written in an extremely WP:PROFRINGE way, based on misinterpretation of sources, poor sources and at times...

failed to find coverage in large English papers. Also has obvious WP:PROFRINGE and WP:PROMOTION issues in its current state (I removed an undue section...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Seriously WP:PROFRINGE, full of synthesis ("oh, look, Hitler killed gay men, that means he thought...

universities, especially when they all toe the same line. I oppose WP:PROFRINGE in our articles. You may read the full rationale at WP:NOBIGOTS. For Wikipedia...

scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This seems to be a WP:PROFRINGE WP:POVFORK of Unidentified flying object, with little or no redeeming...

work and do not mention his theory in the Qibla Article, therefore WP:PROFRINGE does not apply. WP:FRINDStates: "Fringe sources can be used to support...

evidence of pervasive disruptive editing in violation of WP:NPOV, WP:PROFRINGE and WP:V. Additionally there is strong evidence of meat/sock puppetry...

indicating ancient knowledge of DNA at face value are necessarily WP:PROFRINGE. This is the problem. jps (talk) 10:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC) Comment jps...

wish to consider that the special guidelines WP:FRINGE. Among these, WP:PROFRINGE and WP:ONEWAY stick out, and I hesitate to include large portions of this...

partisan and probably promotional/profringe sources. And promotional/profringe sources lead to promotional/profringe articles. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions)...

13:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC) It's not an important distinction, although WP:PROFRINGE editors have tried to pull this stunt many times in the past. We don't...

rife with WP:PROFRINGE cruft. Also appears to have issues with WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The best this list could likely aspire to is a profringe coatrack. Simonm223...

Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:17, 4 September 2015 (UTC) Speedy 'Delete per G-3 and WP:PROFRINGE. This is a rather naked attempt to use the project for the promotion of...

Delete In its current form it clearly violates both WP:NFRINGE and WP:PROFRINGE. Discussimg or referencing patently Fringe and Psuedoscientific subjects...

sources are simply promoting the organization (and so we have to keep WP:PROFRINGE in mind). Some of these items are blatantly promoting the organization...

(UTC) I think what you're missing here is that the list suffers from WP:PROFRINGE. There is a "KEEP!KEEP!KEEP!" !vote below that may indicate that. In that...

because they're PROFRINGE. We should cite the widely accepted Source2. B: Source1 is widely accepted and not PROFRINGE. Source2 is the PROFRINGE one! and things...

their opinion. 172.254.222.178 (talk) 00:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC) Per WP:PROFRINGE, only viewpoints held by at a significant minority need to be covered...

think we should be used as a promotional platform by the WBC (see WP:PROFRINGE) and I don't think we should allow them to co-opt ownership of every bigoted...

Dorothy Kilgallen. (A handful of others have also been involved in the WP:PROFRINGE pushing there.) The latter issue in particular has been the subject of...

thank you. - HyperGaruda (talk) 09:08, 15 December 2015 (UTC) Delete WP:PROFRINGE says: "Proponents of fringe theories have in the past used Wikipedia as...

if they were on the same playing field effectively comes down to a WP:PROFRINGE position, which is seriously problematic. And then of course there's still...

views) This looks heavily WP:PROFRINGE to me. -Ad Orientem (talk) 13:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC) In addition to the PROFRINGE element, the sourcing ranges...

Pseudo-scientific crap and medical quackery backed by fringe sources. Fails WP:PROFRINGE. See also WP:Complete bollocks. Ad Orientem (talk) 16:27, 17 November...

the 6 references are by the inventor of the term, Ref. 5 is likely WP:PROFRINGE and may fail WP:SYNTH, and Ref. 6 is another Wikipedia article (Zaum)...

from the keep !votes. They largely ignored the issues involving DUE, and PROFRINGE while their interpretation of GNG seemed shockingly liberal to me. If...

rings the notability bell. This appears to be a fairly glaring case of WP:PROFRINGE and WP:SPAM Ad Orientem (talk) 17:36, 13 August 2014 (UTC) P.S. See also...

Slywriter (talk) 03:54, 25 September 2021 (UTC) Seems to be some WP:PROFRINGE manoeuvring on the article's Talk page. Alexbrn (talk) 03:59, 25 September...

source the community regards as obviously fringe is evidence of general WP:PROFRINGE sympathies in the topic area. The other was this preliminary discussion...

analysis of this subject. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. Delete per WP:PROFRINGE. Anything that actually needs to be covered can be covered on one of the...

Routledge. On the topic of Satanic Ritual Abuse, I believe she is WP:PROFRINGE, and her works on that topic should not be used. Here are some select...

it. The trouble is that most of the sources that go into detail are WP:PROFRINGE or barely-laundered fringe advocates being quoted in more mainstream publications...

talk|contribs|COI 13:29, 27 August 2014 (UTC) Delete Article appears to be a massive PROFRINGE PROMO piece. As noted by the nom it is also a CONTENTFORK. It violates...

standards. As it stands it is little more than a PROFRINGE essay. The article currently fails WP:V, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:UNDUE. Even if RS sources are found...

(UTC) I think what you're missing here is that the list suffers from WP:PROFRINGE. There is a "KEEP!KEEP!KEEP!" !vote below that may indicate that. In that...

Conspiracy theories about the killing of Seth Rich could not pass WP:PROFRINGE at this point, and Rich's WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE status (see WP:LPI) and family's...

significant. There is no substance, and the existence of the article is WP:PROFRINGE. Actually Raquel Barrow's WP:ASPERSIONS works to substantiate one of my...

like a WP:PROFRINGE article created by the main proponent and socks. jps (talk) 18:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC) Delete: not notable and WP:PROFRINGE. This can...

(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:PROFRINGE article that consists solely of a WP:SYNTH of anecdotes and urban legends...

Subject fails GNG, ORG and NPOV. It's also a pretty glaring example of PROFRINGE. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC) Delete Fails WP:NORG, I...

personal draft space or its original location; the title needs to reflect WP:PROFRINGE if it is kept in main space. Power~enwiki (talk) 23:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)...

would even be possible to rewrite the article to comply with DUE and PROFRINGE due to the dearth of coverage by mainstream sources. The bottom line is...

just as a redirect, would seem to overly legitimize it in contrast to PROFRINGE. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:22, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Keep...

adding a variety of Wikiproject spam to the user talk page promoting WP:PROFRINGE views (Cryptozoology, as usual) of what is a typical folklore motif (diff...

Subject is utterly non-notable. Article is little more than a piece of PROFRINGE SPAM. Sources fail RS. A Google yielded nothing but promotional hits....

Mccapra (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2026 (UTC) Delete Article that is WP:PROFRINGE and cited exclusively to fringe sources. However, there is secondary coverage...

2020 (UTC) ​This article needs some serious work to be compliant with WP:PROFRINGE, but I do see enough high-quality sources to meet the general notability...

WP:SENSATION. The ones by ostensible scientists look like they are fellow WP:PROFRINGE personalities. jps (talk) 11:58, 14 June 2025 (UTC) Local newspapers and...

for some time, it at least needs some secondary sources to not be WP:PROFRINGE. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 16:16, 8 May 2018 (UTC) Relisted to generate...

not supported by current science; appears to be WP:OR Delete: It's WP:PROFRINGE , not valid science, google search comes up with nothing. ThePlatypusofDoom...

for accepted theories of how chemical bonds work. According to the WP:PROFRINGE guidelines, we're not a forum for someone to promote theories with little...

mentioning fringe ideas in a stub article without violating WP:UNDUE and/or WP:PROFRINGE. As for the "museum", it is apparently promotional: "Consisting of a small...

Yes - Remove all - Coindesk and publications like it are effectively WP:PROFRINGE sources advocating a worldview about cryptocurrencies that is not reality-based...

ignored by mainstream reliable sources, that matters (WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:PROFRINGE). Ultimately, the POV of the sources is not the only issue. It's not even...

books and views he's known for is neither biomedical information nor WP:PROFRINGE. And again please look to the sources, not the current or former state...

Roxy the dog. bark 18:22, 21 December 2016 (UTC) Pile on Delete per PROFRINGE and NPOV. As just about everyone has noted it's a POV content fork intended...

deleted. The remaining sources are all WP:MEDPRIMARY and possibly WP:PROFRINGE, and some of them are not about hydrogen administered in aqueous solution...

news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:SYN, WP:PROFRINGE, lack of WP:MEDRS and (in particular) excessive reliance on studies conducted...

--Proud User (talk) 09:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC) Delete WP:POVFORK, WP:PROFRINGE, WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, WP:V, WP:BLP. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2016...

"Multiverse (religion)". Under "Spiritualistic research" it becomes WP:PROFRINGE. In actuality, the multiverse is really only discussed in reliable sources...

WP:N bell. Subject fails WP:BIO and the article fails WP:V as well as WP:PROFRINGE. An examination of the previous AfD left me profoundly unimpressed with...

ignored by mainstream reliable sources, that matters (WP:FALSEBALANCE, WP:PROFRINGE). Ultimately, the POV of the sources is not the only issue. It's not even...

of sources might start people wondering. Please don't insert your WP:PROFRINGE fancies into Wikipedia. Alexbrn (talk) 17:32, 3 July 2021 (UTC) I'm citing...

analysis of this subject. MjolnirPants Tell me all about it. Delete per WP:PROFRINGE. Anything that actually needs to be covered can be covered on one of the...

recieved substantial coverage in mainstream sources. Delete votes reflect WP:PROFRINGE advocacy attempting to give WP:FALSEBALANCE as a volation of WP:NPOV....

worded very carefully in order to comply with WP:FRINGE and particularly PROFRINGE. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:34, 5 November 2016 (UTC) Natch. Alexbrn (talk)...

Fails WP:FRINGE, WP:NPOV and WP:V. It's an almost completely unsourced WP:PROFRINGE essay that, assuming the subject is notable (not a given), would have...

failed to find coverage in large English papers. Also has obvious WP:PROFRINGE and WP:PROMOTION issues in its current state (I removed an undue section...

wish to consider that the special guidelines WP:FRINGE. Among these, WP:PROFRINGE and WP:ONEWAY stick out, and I hesitate to include large portions of this...

(UTC) Delete. Coverage isn't significant; whatwe've got is confected & WP:PROFRINGE. Alexbrn (talk) 08:23, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Comment: As a professor...

indicating ancient knowledge of DNA at face value are necessarily WP:PROFRINGE. This is the problem. jps (talk) 10:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC) Comment jps...

June 2018 (UTC) Wikipedia isn't a venue for promoting pseudoscience (WP:PROFRINGE). I get that you fancy yourself a cryptozoologist (the off-site cryptozoology...

reason for deletion. -- Ϫ 15:06, 29 August 2016 (UTC) According to WP:PROFRINGE, WP:NFRINGE, WP:BLPFRINGE what a person does is absolutely relevant because...

non-notable (there's no exemption for fringe labels like "cryptids") and profringe, with essentially no significant content or reliable sources since its...

3/Oct/2014 reverts "with cometary by the authors" with a citation as WP:PROFRINGE.[392] Atrazine[393] 7 edits all reverts. 22 edits to the talk page[394]...

reliable for scientific claims. As for the CNET piece, it is lovlingly PROFRINGE. As for RSP, the last discussion on the reliability of CNET was 6 years...

for accepted theories of how chemical bonds work. According to the WP:PROFRINGE guidelines, we're not a forum for someone to promote theories with little...

for Doctors and Virusmyth.com are clearly fringe, The Cornell Review is profringe piece by "a sophomore in the College of Engineering" in an independent...

WP:FRINGE stuff... Perhaps this is a case of WP:NOTADVOCATE mixed with WP:PROFRINGE? Whatever the case, it fails WP:GNG. Ceosad (talk) 23:59, 13 November...

misunderstand is always just another WP:PROFRINGE user trying to concern-troll away good articles with PROFRINGE content and anyone who disagrees is, well...

need to be vigilant about subtle and even unintentional ways in which WP:PROFRINGE may enter into article space. I'll leave it to others to address the rest...

was noticed that this article is written like a PR and has flimsy, WP:PROFRINGE sources. Upon analysis of the sources, there was at most one usable item...

what happens in practice. Use of LLMs in communication, especially by WP:PROFRINGE editors, has the potential to burn an enormous amount of editor time as...

February 2019 (UTC) You're treading on thin ice. You have been told about WP:PROFRINGE: presenting this quantum flapdoodle as anything else than WP:FRINGE/PS...

Particularly so when we're looking at an organization that has its hands in WP:PROFRINGE promotion of Wikipedia:Notability#Fringe topics (such as advocating against...

List of Shakespeare authorship candidates), written in an extremely WP:PROFRINGE way, based on misinterpretation of sources, poor sources and at times...

mislead. some latitude can be extended over semantics in order to avoid WP:PROFRINGE. Simonm223 (talk) 19:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC) Mother Jones isn't a robustly...

--Proud User (talk) 09:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC) Delete WP:POVFORK, WP:PROFRINGE, WP:SYNTH, WP:OR, WP:V, WP:BLP. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:07, 9 September 2016...

I didn't realize that was problematic until jps pointed out to me WP:PROFRINGE states we can't reference a topic in a page unless there is a source about...

Instead Wikipedia provides unwarranted promotion for the "concept" (WP:PROFRINGE). In contrast to "Flying ace" or simply "ace" where there are independent...

discussions. Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:22, 18 June 2021 (UTC) Delete WP:PROFRINGE nonsense with serious BLP issues. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:43, 18 June...

users who resist PROFRINGE edits could be removed from the game because they obviously have a "skeptic POV", thus giving PROFRINGE editors free reign...

probably correct. I'll point out that the original revert comment citing WP:PROFRINGE was probably more appropriate, and the revert afterward returning the...

is clear that this is alternative medicine at least. According to WP:PROFRINGE, our goal in seeking to establish notability is to look for independent...

very unreliable sites mostly linked to Reiki and as such this fails WP:PROFRINGE. Not material for an encyclopedia. --Dom from Paris (talk) 12:50, 2 November...

the promulgators and promoters per Wikipedia:FRINGE#Notability and WP:PROFRINGE ("The notability of a fringe theory must be judged by statements from...

20 December 2018 (UTC) No But the sources should pass muster for WP:PROFRINGE - so while an article like the Slate guide to cryptids in the USA might...

at all. "References" from places like AIG violate WP:SECONDARY and WP:PROFRINGE. The topic of creationism is notable, which is why we have the article...

non-notable (there's no exemption for fringe labels like "cryptids") and profringe, with no evidence of significant coverage in reliable sources independent...

endorsing this through "see also", "further reading" or whatever is a WP:PROFRINGE fail. Regardless, the clean-hands doctrine applies: let them propose it...

reliability of the source so much as whether WP:EXTRAORDINARY and WP:PROFRINGE requirements are in play here.Simonm223 (talk) 15:30, 4 July 2019 (UTC)...

first of all this hasn't been brought up but I wanted to say I looked at Profringe, and Quantonics is probably not fringe at all, but rather what is in Wiki...

first of all this hasn't been brought up but I wanted to say I looked at Profringe, and Quantonics is probably not fringe at all, but rather what is in Wiki...

we want to parrot an antivax slogan? There seems to be some dogged WP:PROFRINGE here. Alexbrn (talk) 08:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC) Comment. Don't care...

March 2015 (UTC) Delete. That's not really original reasearch, rather WP:PROFRINGE: giving undue weight to ideas with few and non-influential promoters,...

body) is a WP:NPOV and WP:PROFRINGE issue (not grounds for deletion). Inclusion of long antisemitic primary tracts - NPOV/PROFRINGE - and WP:NOFULLTEXT issue...

distinguish between motives for that reason. If a position results in WP:PROFRINGE, then that's what's happening whether the person who is pushing such a...

homeopathy works, or yes, the lab leak is probably true. Is moving the profringe advocacy to user space the right solution? --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:41...

intelligence arbitration case was in 2010, over a decade ago now, and yet PROFRINGE SPA's still regularly come out of the woodwork like beetle grubs emerging...

proposed elsewhere, would grossly inhibit Wikipedia's ability to combat WP:PROFRINGE and WP:POV editing in the broad and highly important medical area, and...

(talk) 16:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC) Delete as sources appear to be WP:PROFRINGE and the article is, as a result, an in-universe apologia for a fringe...

strong claims about anything, particularly - and this is what the WP:PROFRINGE editors most want to use these journals for - for claims of therapeutic...

September 2021 (UTC). I repeat: I just reverted an obvious profringe edit. If the profringe edit removes something, then, yes, my revert results in adding...

its own views, and then the problem would be WP:WEIGHT and probably WP:PROFRINGE. Alexbrn (talk) 15:46, 29 July 2017 (UTC) Josezetabal: Bruce Greyson's...

which should really be preserved for posterity as an exemplar for what WP:PROFRINGE is. All we need to do in the misinformation article is cover the misinformation...

quoted statements. If, as some suggest it does, this essay discourages WP:PROFRINGE disruption - in addition to providing an interesting historical aspect...

suitable for Wikipedia's purpose of reflecting accepted knowledge, WP:PROFRINGE instrument only. Alexbrn (talk) 16:27, 12 September 2021 (UTC) RS, just...

look. Basically, this boils down to WP:FRIND and its connection to WP:PROFRINGE: there are no sources out there that meet WP:FRIND for all but a handful...

December 2018 (UTC) Was and the article is now protected and stuck on the profringe version. Good job, JzG. A+. 74.70.146.1 (talk) 16:44, 12 December 2018...

history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) Article seems PROFRINGE. It is flagged as having multiple issues, maybe some of the locals here...

yeah no, likely just another Hindutva proponent, please go through WP:PROFRINGE. Tayi Arajakate Talk 20:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC) This stuff is all utter...

(talk) 14:18, 1 September 2023 (UTC) The latter sounds like classic WP:PROFRINGE weaselling, given there seems absolutely no doubt about it.[1] Bon courage...

to dictionaries and primary sources, drawing heavily on the work of WP:PROFRINGE author Richard Lynn. It seems to me that the topic is notable (and it...

significant. There is no substance, and the existence of the article is WP:PROFRINGE. Actually Raquel Barrow's WP:ASPERSIONS works to substantiate one of my...

many others related to it on Wikipedia: mostly in direct violation of WP:PROFRINGE. Individuals who fall out of line with the fringe view, like academics...

pseudoscience. We did not violate WP:FRINGE, a guideline. Specifically WP:PROFRINGE is against articles promoting fringe theories which this article by its...

conspiracy theories. That took a little effort including overcoming some PROFRINGE resistance. Additionaly while working on the Kilgallen article I became...

turn. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears to me that AP was WP:PROFRINGE in that they promoted ideas not supported by science or credible historians...

me. With only a days-old account, you have almost exclusively made WP:PROFRINGE edits to a pseudoscience page, and managed to edit war enough to get a...

believe to be WP:PROFRINGE, WP:FALSEBALANCE, and WP:SYNTH. I've begun a discussion here: Talk:Fertility and intelligence#WP:PROFRINGE / WP:OR. More eyes...

(UTC) These books are RS for what those two gentlemen think, but are WP:PROFRINGE and thus almost certainly undue in any article as sources (though they...

be found our normal practice is not to include that sort of thing per PROFRINGE, NOTADVERT and DUE. I'm not seeing any compelling reason for inclusion...

at. Adoring nanny (talk) 19:10, 5 July 2023 (UTC) Lol. This is just WP:PROFRINGE posturing. No different from what we've seen before. Remember climategate...

holding an RFC to establish that it is fringe could help. After that WP:PROFRINGE applies to anyone who is plainly editing to advocate it. This approach...

that's exactly the case (cf. WP:FRIND, WP:FRINGE, WP:PSEUDOSCIENCE, WP:PROFRINGE, etc.). In fact, let me go ahead and quote WP:FRIND here: Points that...

Wikipedia talk:Fringe theories#RfC: Slight change in first sentence of WP:PROFRINGE Completed - (Initiated 3944 days ago on 1 November 2015) ? Thanks, Cunard...

it trumps WP:PROFRINGE which is merely a Guideline. But if you read carefully, you'll see they don't even conflict. The point of PROFRINGE is that we shouldn't...

all kinds. But a small group consistently attempt to POV-push in a WP:PROFRINGE manner. Marci Bowers, president of WPATH said it well: There are not two...

as a fringe theory has rendered these sources are inadmissible per WP:PROFRINGE, that is, "The issue of the admissibility of sources claiming a genetic...

clear, the proposed changes are not appropriate per WP:EXTRAORDINARY / WP:PROFRINGE. Guy (Help!) 10:23, 9 October 2018 (UTC) The following discussion is closed...

trouble with writing anything about FRINGE is it tends to attract WP:PROFRINGE/disruptive editors looking for something to interpret and use as an attack...

November 2020 (UTC) Edit war happening at Ecclesiastes. A newbie who is a WP:PROFRINGE POV pusher shits on WP:RS/AC. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:39, 24 November 2020...

| watch | logs) Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – WP:PROFRINGE edit warring by IP and by new account. tgeorgescu (talk) 15:39, 1 November...

person's fringe advocacy outside of their field of expertise (see WP:PROFRINGE, WP:BLP#Balance). What does the guideline mean by "obscure a person's...

sources as misinformation in wikivoice, nor to sanction editors for WP:PROFRINGE for raising them. YFNS' objections - which you have consistently supported...

the WP:PROFRINGE edit at [39]. Please chime in. Tgeorgescu (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2017 (UTC) The issue with Robert Sungenis is not WP:PROFRINGE, but WP:BLP...

this falls flatly into the realm of promotion of fringe theories (WP:PROFRINGE). Additionally, none of the articles the user is adding this category...

conspiracy theory, which caused the article to be in violation of WP:PROFRINGE. I have attempted to address this in Special:Diff/978047396/979186634...

(UTC) It's a mess. I removed the second lead paragaph, as it was a WP:PROFRINGE disaster, but it still needs more work. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 16:36...

Temporary extended confirmed protection: Persistent disruptive editing – WP:PROFRINGE edits by various IPs and newbie accounts. tgeorgescu (talk) 05:40, 29...

scientific journals on the planet, and replaced it with unsourced WP:PROFRINGE content based on your personal opinion. I would advise that medical articles...

Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Global_cooling: Persistent tendentious profringe editing by a suspected sockpuppeteer. No autoconfirmed accounts are suspected...

as WP:PROFRINGE for dissenting from what ended up being the consensus. @SMcCandlish: Accused me of being WP:PROMOTIONAL (diff) and WP:PROFRINGE. When...

disruptive editing – 3 users (possibly all the same user) trying to add WP:PROFRINGE content cited to WP:DAILYMAIL. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:03, 13 January...

article. An argument might be made for notability but it is so completely PROFRINGE that I doubt it is salvageable. Most of the sources are fringe. My gut...

Temporary semi-protection: Persistent vandalism – Different IPs with WP:PROFRINGE edits. Tgeorgescu (talk) 06:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC) Pending-changes protected...

watch | logs) Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – PROFRINGE disruption by multiple IPs because of a recent development. RandomCanadian...

deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - did a mass PROFRINGE edit throughout the whole article, then another edit to downplay the antisemitic...

deletion per WP:PROFRINGE. After two reverts, I was initially advised that WP:3RR does not apply when reverting vandalism/profringe. But after four reverts...

2020 RfC; we were not censoring anything, but merely complying with WP:PROFRINGE and WP:UNDUE in removing some references or revising the text that cited...

Wider Lens before getting blocked there, here[1], and later globally for PROFRINGE editing involving trying to whitewash SEGM and push FRINGE views into...

promote very early dating for NT writings, especially based upon a WP:PROFRINGE book by a certain Jonathan Bernier. I mean: from the title of his book...

Persistent disruptive editing – SPA and single-purpose IP engaging in PROFRINGE edit warring. Crossroads -talk- 06:40, 4 March 2021 (UTC) Declined – Warn...

other hand. bobrayner (talk) 15:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Yep. It's a WP:PROFRINGE masterpiece. I have tagged it accordingly. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:23,...

use or not of Quackwatch significantly affects things like WP:DUE, WP:PROFRINGE, or WP:BLPBALANCE needs to be done on a case-by-case at the relevant BLP...

The article appears to be object of some ongoing and rather aggressive PROFRINGE editing. I've been doing a lot of reverting. Personally I think the whole...

WP:MEDRS). —PaleoNeonate – 21:16, 28 October 2021 (UTC) They seem WP:PROFRINGE. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:01, 28 October 2021 (UTC) Dr. Campbell describes...

SEGM from a WP:PROFRINGE perspective downplaying how the medical community considers their views FRINGE and 2) longstanding WP:PROFRINGE pushing across...

20:58, 13 June 2021 (UTC) Wrong. Using a BLP as a WP:COATRACK for WP:PROFRINGE medical misinformation is not acceptable, and editors doing it should...

recent editing history, I think it's a tough calll on whether this is WP:PROFRINGE. It might be. But I would definitely call it aggressive POV editing. In...

watch | logs) Temporary full protection: Content dispute/edit warring – PROFRINGE disruption in blatant disregard of talk page consensus against this. Not...

does it say that? Ideas are ideas, and people are people. While some WP:PROFRINGE editors have in the past tried to WP:CRYBLP and extend biographical protection...

Ove Hansson (see link).[57] I was reported to WP:FTN with the message Profringe editors teaming up on the Talk page, untoward consequences expected. [58]...

WP:PROFRINGE and possibly a WP:POVFORK for Male privilege? Thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2022 (UTC) It reads more WP:PROFRINGE than...

links | watch | logs | views) A perennial favourite is back, with WP:PROFRINGE attempts to advocate for this BS in the lede. As ever, fringe-savvy eyes...

sockpuppetry – Series of IPs and socks/'new editors' showing up to push WP:PROFRINGE. MrOllie (talk) 20:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC) Extended confirmed protected...

advocated, which reliable sources agree are false. Kashmiri has a history of profringe advocacy on other western pro-assad figures like Piers Robinson, who is...

(UTC) Burrobert and Kashmiri have already demonstrated that they are WP:PROFRINGE and pro-disinformation when it comes to the Syrian Civil War. The correct...

is probably going to have to be heavily edited to try and remove the PROFRINGE and POV tone. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC) US Department...

pseudoscientific views are mentioned. That is all. Anything else is WP:PROFRINGE pov-pushing. Alexbrn (talk) 06:07, 23 April 2018 (UTC) Is it that simple...

multiple chemical sensitivity and other fringe topics on which a strong PROFRINGE POV is exhibited. Guy (help!) 11:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC) If that is a pattern...

conspiracy theorists who have made multiple attempts to introduce WP:PROFRINGE material into the article in contravention of the aforelinked guidelines...

structures: What works, what doesn't, and why, but the articles are currently profringe, as the seem to take the impact hypothesis as true when the claims are...

problem with profringe editors". It is your personal conclusion that, if someone posts here after discussing you, they must regard you as a profringe user. Also...

or worth the fee is kind of an essential point. It would seem a bit WP:PROFRINGE not to say this in the lede. As to the "laundry list" complaint, I don't...

external links. An earlier relevant discussion is at Talk:Bryant G. Wood#PROFRINGE controversy. The OP there is no longer active having stopped editing shortly...

(UTC) That's not a way to engender discussion - and one might cite WP:PROFRINGE. Are there any actual WP:RSes (no - RT would not count as one) treating...

speculating about who meant what, is also disingenious special pleading from PROFRINGE editors. Ebell's job is to claim that the climate experts are wrong, and...

9 May 2021 (UTC) All of the complaints here are complaints about WP:PROFRINGE and WP:UNDUE. That's it. There's nothing more to discuss about this. This...

have a WP:FRINGE guideline. It's because it's often the case that WP:PROFRINGE prose ends up being promoted if we aren't careful. jps (talk) 01:12, 29...

have come to the conclusion that this is likely a classic case of WP:PROFRINGE: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Solomon. jps (talk) 11:47, 19 April...

must promote it in other articles (relevant: WP:NOT, WP:FRINGELEVEL, WP:PROFRINGE, WP:ONEWAY). If a person or organization is notable enough for an article...

building. --Ronz (talk) 03:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC) There seems to be some PROFRINGE tendentious editing going on there. I am INVOLVED so my superhero tool...

(talk): WP:MEDRS / profringe edits)‎ 21:19, 25 April 2023‎/(Reverted 1 edit by 128.252.154.2 (talk): Sure I did - WP:MEDRS ./ profringe edit) 21:33, 25 April...

(UTC) The elephant in the room is that any would-be (or even actual) WP:PROFRINGE editors (and yes, they do exist) will have FTN in their sights as a consensus-based...

I think the sheer volume of WP:PROFRINGE accusations being thrown out here and above, in the absence of any PROFRINGE actions or statements from any user...

shortcut the usual routes to address bad edits and assume a single WP:PROFRINGE edit instantly equals WP:NOTHERE and act accordingly to drive people away...

pseudoscience. We did not violate WP:FRINGE, a guideline. Specifically WP:PROFRINGE is against articles promoting fringe theories which this article by its...

block log) Making repeated edits at Cannabidiol. These are rather WP:PROFRINGE and are original research woven around primary sources, but the kicker...

Open to improvements, but policy/consensus seems clear here that a WP:PROFRINGE direction is not one the article should be heading in. Alexbrn (talk)...

flights of fancy. I am not skilled enough to decide whether this is a WP:PROFRINGE matter, but my spidey sense seems to indicate that this is the case. @Jjhake:...

you believe everything you wrote, but what you wrote is essentially WP:PROFRINGE until you find the WP:MAINSTREAM sources that back it up. Them's the breaks...

there recently. We may want to keep an eye on this given the history of PROFRINGE editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:53, 9 March 2019 (UTC) Terrible article...

stated above, the source provided does not support monorchism. From WP:PROFRINGE, "A conjecture that has not received critical review from the scientific...

WP:YESPOV is particularly important for WP:FRINGE topics. It is a WP:PROFRINGE gambit to make knowledge appear to be serious contested (e.g. whether...

beliefs. I care about your actions. And your actions continue to be WP:PROFRINGE in favor of the claims of FC believers. jps (talk) 19:19, 15 August 2025...

expositions of "evidence" presented in favor for them as unabiguously WP:PROFRINGE. Another systemic problem for the evaluation of these proposals is variable...

few AfDs, and address the issue head on that we should still avoid WP:PROFRINGE while still recognizing this is clearly notable, even if the sourcing...

thing, let alone one warranting an entire article. See the similarly WP:PROFRINGE Luso–Danish expedition to North America AFD for similar discussions, but...

need us. Viriditas (talk) 08:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC) Merge - from WP:PROFRINGE: "Proponents of fringe theories have used Wikipedia as a forum for promoting...

happen now is that this thread needs to be deep frozen because the WP:PROFRINGE WP:STICK-wielding is getting tiresome. Alexbrn (talk) I'm asking what...

and stats that debunk it are somehow biased is WP:FALSEBALANCE and WP:PROFRINGE. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2024 (UTC) "Wikipedia should...

April 2026 (UTC) And the issue people see is if all the sources are WP:PROFRINGE it isn't possible to write an article compliant article with our policies...

fringe topics where it's useful per WP:PARITY to achieve WP:NPOV. WP:PROFRINGE editors are constantly trying to extend WP:BLP protections to antiscience...

discussion. 24.236.207.173 (talk) 22:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC) "Profringe" means WP:PROFRINGE, which is part of our WP:RULES. Wikipedia sides with mainstream...

Wracking talk! 20:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC) There has been some pushing of WP:PROFRINGE views going on at the Jordan Lasker page. Additional editors with experience...

WP:PROFRINGE. Similarly, a reliable source might publish an article about this topic or write a book about this topic without being WP:PROFRINGE. You...

reported if reliable sources are available and it does not violate WP:PROFRINGE and WP:BLPFRINGE. However, Wikipedia functions on consensus and here the...

My current feeling is that The Washington Post article is far too WP:PROFRINGE for my liking. ThePlatypusofDoom (Talk) 21:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC) Are you...

itself isn't believed to have enough demonstrate to evidence. Clearly WP:PROFRINGE, lost of weasel-y language and the topic itself fails WP:GNG. Most of...

further than a whole mass of fermented grievances and falsehoods from a PROFRINGE editor who thinks Trump can do no wrong, that all of our articles that...

rife with WP:PROFRINGE cruft. Also appears to have issues with WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. The best this list could likely aspire to is a profringe coatrack. Simonm223...

9 February 2017 (UTC) Whitewashing pseudoscience peddlers is still WP:PROFRINGE. There is no WP:BLP violation in describing why Sungenis's viewpoints...

by a fringe author that got a lot of attention in fringe sources. WP:PROFRINGE applies here and there's very little evidence that this book is of significance...

some disagreement that the belief that language was demonstrated is WP:PROFRINGE, so I’m hoping some other editors here are familiar with this topic. Warrenᚋᚐᚊᚔ...

(talk) 17:59, 12 November 2024 (UTC) And it is now being used to source WP:PROFRINGE allegations of an IGN / Sweet Baby Inc. protection racket conspiracy....

fringe theories and beliefs. Please see WP:FRINGE and in particular WP:PROFRINGE. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:45, 4 January 2017 (UTC) Resolved...

not mean that the quote must necessarily be included in an article WP:PROFRINGE: Efforts of fringe-theory inventors to promote their theories, such as...

fact we even have to discuss this suggests we should be vigilant of WP:PROFRINGE viewpoints proliferating in this topic area. Lewisguile (talk) 10:37,...

User:Geogene has decided that things like National Geographic are WP:PROFRINGE and WP:PRIMARY despite it being fine per WP:NATGEO. Earthquake lights...

should be taken to WP:AE for WP:PROFRINGE editing. This is not a hazy or complex situation, it's red-line classic profringe editing and should be treated...

Should we be using this article for anything? It seems quite WP:PROFRINGE to me. :bloodofox: (talk) 00:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC) It's reliable...

they had, he was not happy, but what could he say back? Most of the WP:PROFRINGE want to use Wikipedia to change the world and that's fundamentally why...

it. No indication that it functions as anything but an outlet for WP:PROFRINGE without context. Compare the Journal of Scientific Exploration. jps (talk)...

bad-faith editing / pseudoscience pushing (PROFRINGE) Link: Talk:Acupuncture#Survey (lead sentence) "WP:PROFRINGE proposal which violates core WP:PSCI policy...

need to be vigilant about subtle and even unintentional ways in which WP:PROFRINGE may enter into article space. I'll leave it to others to address the rest...

interest. But the 'dispute' of editors doesn't count, especially if it's PROFRINGE or flies in the face of our requirement for NPOV. Some editors seemingly...

the concept outside of that single source and veers dangerously into WP:PROFRINGE territory with the WP:OR links to fringe theory language families like...

appears to pass WP:NPROF#C1. In this situation (where the article is WP:PROFRINGE but passes notability), I think we're supposed to keep the article and...

America was deleted for WP:PROFRINGE Da Serra–American conflict on WP:GNG and WP:SYNTH grounds Portuguese Newfoundland on WP:PROFRINGE and WP:OR They've been...

no project exists to represent the contrary bias onwiki (where is our PROFRINGE noticeboard?), seems to assume those voicing this view are already treating...

noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:GNG-failing articles report for further context. scope_creepTalk...

reading three separate times (1 2, 3), then said that I was either WP:PROFRINGE or WP:CIR afflicted (here), after which they decided to just reply to...

There are no serious scholars advocated for lab leak theory. This is a WP:PROFRINGE point you are advocating for now, and it is very disconfirming for me...

There are no serious scholars advocated for lab leak theory. This is a WP:PROFRINGE point you are advocating for now, and it is very disconfirming for me...

WP:SENSATION. The ones by ostensible scientists look like they are fellow WP:PROFRINGE personalities. jps (talk) 11:58, 14 June 2025 (UTC) Local newspapers and...

above, we don't need to relitigate reliable source to accommodate WP:PROFRINGE editors who take offense when their fringe topics run into the face of...

contribs) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1178#WP:PROFRINGE & WP:MEAT by Kirny Wirny Unnecessary  ToDo Blocked Ironfist7 (talk · contribs)...

today they have responded to my MFD notification with insults and WP:PROFRINGE ranting at Special:Diff/1273404086. Quoting MacOisdealbh: I suggest you...

—S Marshall T/C 15:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC) The core of the dispute is that it is a WP:PROFRINGE source. The authors did not do anything even resembling due diligence...

(UTC) Completed - (Initiated 1118 days ago on 28 July 2023) Ad nauseam WP:PROFRINGE propaganda. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:09, 28 August 2023 (UTC) {{done}} CLYDE...

article around that probably need to be AfDd. Fails GNG and inherently PROFRINGE. Warrenmck (talk) 18:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Delete. As per everyone...

2023 (UTC) Completed - (Initiated 1016 days ago on 6 November 2023) WP:PROFRINGE, ad nauseam. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC) {{close}}...

evidence" 19:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Indisputable evidence */ WP:PROFRINGE" 19:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC) "/* Indisputable evidence */ proof is for...

Aliens-style sensationalism, and that this user is trying to push WP:PROFRINGE Atlantis content into the article, so I want a second opinion. Hemiauchenia...

is a factual claim (and a correct one, which we should include per WP:PROFRINGE); not a label. That's what WP:INTEXT tells us to use in wikivoice, and...

deletion/James Woodward (physicist) and I came over here to find a WP:PROFRINGE and WP:NOTCV promotional article for an academic that I do not see passing...

study implies weight is not at all correct. This approach leads to WP:PROFRINGE problems, among other things. It always takes more effort to debunk bad...

reason to use a dodgy source like this on Wikipedia, and I'd suspect WP:PROFRINGE at the heart of any insistence so to do. Bon courage (talk) 16:56, 18...

are all entities from folklore — the cryptozoology coat of paint is WP:PROFRINGE — and we already have the extremely dubious list of cryptids with no criteria...

be developed as a prescription drug. Mention of research on it is WP:PROFRINGE, potentially misleading general users into believing it may actually be...

certainly not all, wanting to make it a SPS tend to have, at best, a WP:PROFRINGE attitude . Simply put, there is editorial oversight of contributors. We...

including the claims of success as anything other than rejected is WP:PROFRINGE. Just a couple of comments on the consensus which, sadly, don't meet WP:RS/AC's...

like Jordan Peterson, have career trajectories very similar to other WP:PROFRINGE academics like parapsychologists, but, have you considered that a newspaper...

Indeed. This is not a problem. Over the years, on the few occasions a WP:PROFRINGE editor has tried erroneously to play the "seriously contested" card to...

noticeboard/Incidents#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and WP:GNG-failing articles report for further context. scope_creepTalk...

20:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC) "/* Proposed statement */ Reply" Comments: Profringe edit warring on COVID-19 related article. IP address is obviously the...

Questionable conducts by editors regarding reputable sources */ Reply" Comments: Profringe edit warring about ESP. Everyone else who has commented on the talk page...

frequent addition of New York Times/pop-science articles (sometimes with WP:PROFRINGE issues when it comes to dark matter in particular) to space-related topics...

minimal but falls short of being WP:FRINGE; but at a bare minimum WP:PROFRINGE and WP:FALSEBALANCE clearly and unambiguously forbid us from both-sidesing...

12 June 2026 (UTC) Just delete it. This looks like self-published WP:PROFRINGE. Nothing it has to say is reliable. Simonm223 (talk) 12:16, 12 June 2026...

from the article; smacks of WP:PROFRINGE [2] 29 June 2024—smacks of WP:PROFRINGE [3] 29 June 2024—smacks of WP:PROFRINGE [4] 30 June 2024—violates WP:NPA...

their notoriety. Because such issues were apparent, there were also WP:PROFRINGE supporters who wanted to downplay the "they carry water for pseudoscience"...

work and do not mention his theory in the Qibla Article, therefore WP:PROFRINGE does not apply. WP:FRINDStates: "Fringe sources can be used to support...

theory and has been bombarding the page with borderline-incoherent and WP:PROFRINGE comments, most recently removing[48] one of mine that raised this. The...

(this was potentially heavy handed, but the sources given were clearly WP:PROFRINGE). As a result of that AfD, multiple editors worked on changing the long-static...

their profringe blog for views on eugenics. 24 May 2026 More of the same 25 May 2026 WP:POINTy use of edit summary 25 May 2026 Asserts profringe positions...

calling the idea that COVID came of of Fort Detrick a "theory" is so WP:PROFRINGE it's probably worth a visit to WP:AE alone, let alone when it's edit-warred...

need us. Viriditas (talk) 08:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC) Merge - from WP:PROFRINGE: "Proponents of fringe theories have used Wikipedia as a forum for promoting...

knowing how to handle GENSEX WP:PROFRINGE activism - frankly this is a topic area where admins never deal with WP:PROFRINGE editors who've learned to WP:CPUSH...

February 2024 (UTC) This is a pretty pathetic argument, bordering on WP:PROFRINGE. jps (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC) And apparently this article being...

link: Ray Epps (military veteran) That's both a severe BLP violation and WP:PROFRINGE. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2023 (UTC) Im at...

warnings since punitive and overly broad bans drive editors away. 3) WP:PROFRINGE/WP:RGW editors should be shown the door, even if they're civil, as they...

it appears to be self-promotion. The same user included borderline WP:PROFRINGE content (if the programme was notable in itself, and it was sourced, describing...

(talk) 16:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC) Delete as sources appear to be WP:PROFRINGE and the article is, as a result, an in-universe apologia for a fringe...

and stats that debunk it are somehow biased is WP:FALSEBALANCE and WP:PROFRINGE. Bluethricecreamman (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2024 (UTC) "Wikipedia should...

from dutch wiki, which was originally written by a now globally blocked PROFRINGE user and contains numerous sourcing/POV issues. It was taken to Wikipedia:Articles...

mailing list before I got into editing on both attacks against me (Arb & Profringe). T&S handled all my requests promptly and respectfully and this time...

SEGM. Also, WP:FRINGE § Unwarranted promotion of fringe theories (WP:PROFRINGE) disqualifies fringe organizations from consideration when evaluating...

articles such as Universe and Teleology which are simply WP:OR and WP:PROFRINGE. Particularly their rejection that the term universe is defined, and edit...

Particularly so when we're looking at an organization that has its hands in WP:PROFRINGE promotion of Wikipedia:Notability#Fringe topics (such as advocating against...

pages, edit warred, tried claiming procedural violations to restore WP:PROFRINGE content removed by multiple editors, and in general seem to play fast...

ories/Noticeboard#Journal_of_Astrobiology, again WP:NPA calling me WP:PROFRINGE, which I'm really getting tired at this point. Having a disagreement about...

influencer silliness into a Wikipedia article, repeatedly reinstating WP:PROFRINGE content (implicitly, if not explicitly). We currently treat a little "avoid...

(talk) 11:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC) Those aren't WP:FRINGE though. WP:PROFRINGE clearly applies here. SportingFlyer T·C 13:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)...

personal attack then so is GG's claim that my edit was "profringe". Something being "profringe" implies it is based on unevidenced assumptions. 5. With...

WP:MEDRS violations, or clear-cut WP:COPYVIO problems, or glaring WP:PROFRINGE issues, we have no choice but to go back to the other version. Even lesser...

talk | history | links | watch | logs) Temporary semi-protection: WP:PROFRINGE by various IPs. tgeorgescu (talk) 10:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC) Declined –...

Inquirer? Skeptic2 had a correct view of this article as a book review of a PROFRINGE work and there are better sources to cite for the same content. This is...

how these edits violate it 19:23, 4 May 2023 Inappropriate use of WP:PROFRINGE / WP:EXTERNAL link. This user is well aware that this is disruptive and...

Mccapra (talk) 05:52, 24 January 2026 (UTC) Delete Article that is WP:PROFRINGE and cited exclusively to fringe sources. However, there is secondary coverage...

" (Higgs 2006, p. 209.) Yet for some reason I was accused of being WP:PROFRINGE, go figure. Might you possibly be referring to the rest of the paragraph...

these edits violate it [11] 13 February 2024—WP:PROFRINGE whitewashing [12] 19 February 2024—WP:PROFRINGE whitewashing [13] 19 February 2024—odd talk page...

"civil" (a bar that's surprisingly low) All your edits in GENSEX are civil PROFRINGE nonsense? Untouchable. a surprising number of editors see no difference...

related to COVID-19 as it seems that their primary activity may be WP:PROFRINGE WP:ADVOCACY (I will not speculate on the intention of the account, only...

WP:VERIFIABILITY, and I'd included it since I'd seen it be standard practice with WP:PROFRINGE to, if someone is known for their fringe position on a medical issues...

noticeboard/IncidentArchive1177#User:Jaozinhoanaozinho and persistant WP:SYNTH, WP:PROFRINGE, and_WP:GNG-failing articles You do seem to have received good feedback...

is unbalanced and should be rewritten/tagged, based on long forumy WP:PROFRINGE rants. Your Friendly Neighborhood Sociologist ⚧ Ⓐ (talk) 01:26, 15 December...

June 2025 (UTC) VIR demonstrates a clear pattern of WP:TENDENTIOUS/WP:PROFRINGE editing across GENSEX. He repeats arguments across multiple forums and...

AI. As a long-time editor who has frequently stumbled upon intense WP:PROFRINGE content, fended off armies of outside actors looking to shape the site...

but User:Randy Kryn is somewhat uncharacteristically engaging in WP:PROFRINGE argumentation over at WP:FTN in rather surprising ways. He seems to be...

with marginal viewpoints need to be slightly more cautious to avoid WP:PROFRINGE editing, but we need editors who will spot eg. weak citations or undue...

highly controversial subject. This page is going to be a magnet for POV/PROFRINGE editing pretty much forever. Pending changes should slow that down. I...

them were. I still object to the characterization of JCJC's edits as WP:PROFRINGE, though. Loki (talk) 04:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC) Pseudoscience absolutely...

difference between me and him is that I got that point: I was wrong about WP:PROFRINGE in talk pages being prohibited. That earned me a warning, and I do not...

[344] Makes me suspect some kind of grudge editing by means of this WP:PROFRINGE pot stirring at the Havana syndrome article. It would be a policy violation...

Lipton (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Reason: mostly WP:PROFRINGE edits by IPs. 93.72.49.123 (talk) 14:42, 28 August 2023 (UTC) Declined...

and (b) it was hard to frame it in a way that gave due weight to medref/profringe. Then the discussion got closed, and things turned into a revert war over...

watch | logs) Temporary semi-protection: Persistent disruptive editing – Profringe edit warring from multiple IPs. MrOllie (talk) 02:26, 9 January 2024 (UTC)...

| links | watch | logs) Reason: Persistent edit warring to include WP:PROFRINGE content in the WP:ARBR&I contentious topic area by IP editors. Generalrelative...

few exceptions they are not NPOV nor well-sourced -- many are either WP:PROFRINGE or written in something like WP:INUNIVERSE with bizarre assumptions, turns...

behavior can at best be described as WP:TENDENTIOUS, WP:RGW, WP:CPUSH and WP:PROFRINGE. On VIR's talk page at the moment is a discussion where they claim that...

remedy, and an explanation how these edits violate it [53] 5 June 2024—WP:PROFRINGE whitewashing [54] 5 June 2024—tag bombing Almost all their edits at Reiki...

challenge to find recent diffs from this user that are not active WP:PROFRINGE WP:POVPUSH WP:AGENDA edits. What is going on? If contentious topics restrictions...

to suggest a boomerang. VIR's diffs are mostly links to their own WP:PROFRINGE behavior: 1 & 2 : WP:CALC is part of the policy WP:OR. Raladic had every...

seems they have also been egged-on, and made more combative from other PROFRINGE users (and probably some anti-FRINGE users as well who do admittedly WP:BITE)...

(reasons). My reason for misbehaving was that I did not know that WP:PROFRINGE is allowed on talk pages. I have learned this fact and I will behave accordingly...

blatantly bad content. Like UFO level blatantly bad. It seems to me WP:PROFRINGE editors in some topic areas get told right off to go edit somewhere else...

indirect harms could certainly be worse than direct harms caused by a proFRINGE editor, depending on the case. However, I would argue "being wrong is...