Talk:Tartarian Empire

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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

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

Text and/or other creative content from Tartary was copied or moved into Tartarian Empire (conspiracy theory) on 24 April 2023. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

On 2 November 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved from Tartarian Empire (conspiracy theory) to Tartarian Empire. The result of the discussion was moved.

Out of curiosity, has anyone noticed how many times QAnon is used in the “Conspiracy Theory” section of this article? I understand the implied bias of adding QAnon into anything. QAnon is equivalent to a slur when it’s constantly used in association with anything that’s outside of the purview of normally substantive narratives. In regard to the Tartaian Empire with all things being considered it isn’t really necessary to use the word “QAnon” to further slander people associated with it. “QAnon” is a slander when you pump it into context as many times as you can in a single paragraph.

Article on "The Dangers of Pseudohistorical Conspiracy Theories" using Tartaria as an example

[1]. Looks very good. Doug Weller talk 07:54, 10 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another source

[2] Inside the ‘Tartarian Empire,’ the QAnon of Architecture Doug Weller talk 21:02, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Weller Its already incorporated into the article? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:41, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@CaptainEekSorry, thought I'd checked. Ah, I must have searched for Blomberg and not actually looked directly at the citations! Doug Weller talk 06:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 November 2023

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.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 05:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tartarian Empire (conspiracy theory) → Tartarian Empire – Tartarian Empire existed as a redirect to Tartary before this article was created. This article should really have replaced the redirect rather than creating a new page. The disambiguation is unnecessary. "Tartarian Empire" appears to primarily (perhaps only) refer to the conspiracy theory. MClay1 (talk) 01:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Per WP:TITLEDAB, disambiguation is only necessary when there is otherwise an actual conflict in article titles. No such conflict in titles exists. Per WP:CONCISE, concision is preferred over unnecessary precision. Parham wiki (talk) 16:14, 6 November 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.

Add simple rebuttals and fact checks, like the maps dont actually show a global Tartaria, or those buildings and technologies have no connection to Tartaria whatsoever

Add simple rebuttals to the theory, for example the theory states that Tartaria ruled Europe and America, but there are no maps that show this. The theory believes that certain buildings and "suppresed technologies" belonged to this so called Tartarian civilization, but there is no connection between those buildings or technologies and Tartaria.

In other words, the theory is based on nothing. Xclamationmark (talk) 13:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from source #7

The following quote from the article quoted to describe the conspiracy theory as “the QAnon of Architecture”

”The Tartaria storyline is not directly related to the adrenochrome-harvesting Satanic-pedophile cabal that lies at the heart of QAnon, the unfounded conspiracy theory that crashed into the real world in 2020. But it shares some of what Peter Ditto, a social psychologist at the University of California-Irvine who specializes in conspiracy theories, calls QAnon’s “cafeteria quality:” There’s no overarching narrative or single authorial voice interpreting events. It’s just a gusher of outlandish speculation; adherents can pick and choose which elements they want to sign on to.”

This quote in relation to article clearly shows an odd bias and an unnecessary use of “QAnon” making it apparent that the writer of this section is using it as a prop word to upset people. The Tartarian conspiracy theorists aren’t related to QAnon in any way whatsoever outside of guests circulating the same Podcast and YouTube circuits. This paragraph is unnecessary if it isn’t relative to the article itself. You need to keep it in the context of the original article. Using QAnon in such divisive way is not prone to allow critical thought. KegLord216 (talk) 01:52, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Two distinct authors relate it to QAnon, which bolsters the link. It's being used as something that readers will be familiar with. It's value is as comparison. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:45, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should ignore this editor. 14 edits including the above. This grammar change[3] which incorrectly changed a statement about the past to present tense. Then an edit "Removed unnecessary usage of the word “antisemitism”" - from the material we are discussing. 4 edits all misrepresented in the edit summary as fixed typo trying to add "Dr." in front of someone's name, all reverted. And two edits here and one to the article. I'll add “antisemitism to the article. I have no reason to think this is anything other than an attempt to whitewash the article. Doug Weller talk 09:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]