Jump to content

Talk:Robert W. Malone

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



False

[edit]

Why does so many false and outdated claims persist in this article ? Who is doing it !? It seems as someone is protecting a “narrative”. 2A02:AA7:4103:E804:34E8:D7BB:CC64:27A1 (talk) 20:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If there is a specific claim, please point it out. Everything is supported by reliable sources, so any changes would need reliable sources supporting them as well. EvergreenFir (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, that is untrue. Thes is a fake entry. 192.251.109.39 (talk) 19:57, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is? Slatersteven (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2024

[edit]

Robert Malone did not spread misinformation regarding the MRNA vaccination. Until you can site multiple credible sources this is extremely incorrect information. 2600:100E:B068:D3B5:64EB:3115:8AA3:C3FD (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: There are already half a dozen citations saying he did. Jamedeus (talk) 22:52, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and all fake. 192.251.109.39 (talk) 19:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is? Slatersteven (talk) 20:16, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An opinion presented as fact

[edit]

In the opening paragraph several sources are quoted and their claims (now known to be false) are presented as facts: "During the COVID-19 pandemic, Malone promoted misinformation about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines." His information was in fact accurate, he is in fact one of the inventors of the mRNA vaccine technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JanBielawski (talkcontribs) 15:55, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See talk page archive for every answer to this. Slatersteven (talk) 16:00, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Spot on! 194.24.8.66 (talk) 13:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The guy who invented mRNA vaccines was spreading vaccine misinformation. It's misinformation because some nobody writing for The Atlantic said so. 2600:6C5D:40F0:71E0:390B:C356:B44:5C4 (talk) 19:17, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You do need to check other sources though! ShowierData9978 (talk) 19:19, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And read the article. Slatersteven (talk) 08:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dr. Malone did NOT spread false information during COVID. Those who say otherwise are the ones spreading disinformation. See the documentary film, "Thank You, Dr. Fauci", available on different platforms, if you care to know the truth. Wikipedia is not a credible source for truth. 50.102.198.252 (talk) 11:55, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion about what is true does not matter. Wikipedia will continue to follow reliable sources. --Hob Gadling (talk) 12:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's precisely the problem. What truth is based on. For Wikipedia, presenting as truth, what is based on what they call "reliable sources", is the chosen option. It works well as long the so called "reliable sources" haven't engaged into a propaganda war against even common sense. As a result, mechanically, that propaganda is landing into Wikipedia.
Making Wikipedia admins to consider that it can be problematic is pretty difficult, even impossible. Because they see as source of truth what they call reliable (falling on the initial bias mentioned), and not as a source of propaganda, indeed. So it falls on deaf ears.
But now it has become so rotten with that, not only for Dr. Malone. All of those who haven't complied with "The ministry of Truth" are labelled "conspiracy theorist", and it stays, even if what they said was indeed true, as we know now.
So let's make things clear, once for all: Wikipedia is not an Encyclopedia, but a political propaganda tool, where the most conformist editing participants are promoted admins, so that they can block anyone not sharing their vue. The result is that disaster. 2A0D:3344:23E3:7A10:E21B:8CF2:8ED3:29A6 (talk) 09:08, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This page is about improving the article Robert W. Malone, following the current Wikipedia rules. If you do not like those rules, go to Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources. But there, like here, you will need valid reasoning instead of just your opinion. --Hob Gadling (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 20

[edit]

Reference 20 is a dead link. Rfjk (talk) 10:38, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Archive is down, temporarily. Bon courage (talk) 11:51, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2024

[edit]

Change "Malone promoted misinformation about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines." to "Malone was accused of promoting misinformation about the safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines."

As no-one can perfectly arbitrate what is misinformation and what is not it's disingenuous to say definitively that he promoted misinformation as we can't know for sure what is misinformation and what is not. Doogiej7 (talk) 10:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes we can, as a lie is a lie, did the Pfizer–BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines worsen COVID-19 infections? Was the Chairman of the Thomson Reuters Foundation was a board member at Pfizer? Slatersteven (talk) 10:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is biased trash controlled by the same usual wikipedia power users

[edit]

A phrase such as "promoted misinformation" is completely unencyclopedic, and there is an established routine of maintaining such terms on wikipedia by power users such as Slatersteven, through endless reverting of edits. Many comments on this talk page have been reverted by power users, making it seem like there is less dissent to this practice. These are nebulous, in vogue terms, intended to savage a reputation. You ought to use a neutral tone, and this is not a neutral tone. Countlessly many comments mention that this language is inappropriate, yet it endures somehow due to power-users endlessly reverting edits on the article due to the padlock it, which is to prevent...vandalism? The power-users are in fact behaving as vandals. 60.240.156.235 (talk) 13:59, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We go by what RS say. Slatersteven (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]