Talk:Piers Corbyn

Conspiracy theorist

Corbyn is a conspiracy theorist. He’s propagated various conspiracy theories including denying climate change, denying the existence of COVID-19, etc.--LeftiePete (talk) 16:17, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

And the reliable sources calling him a conspiracy theorist? And simply denying climate change or COVID-19 does not make one a conspiracy theorist. Meters (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

I see an earlier edit by this user added a source that does show that Corbyn went further than just denying the existence of something and blamed it on a conspiracy, but it did not label him as a "conspiracy theorist". Wikipedia does decide when such labels are appropriate. We report when sources use such labels. Meters (talk) 19:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

[1][2][3] -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 20:43, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

The latter two local sources are not sufficient for this label in the first sentence. The first national source contributes only a fraction of the way towards it. — Bilorv (talk) 20:47, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, it didn’t take long to find articles describing Corbyn as a “conspiracy theorist”. Here are two examples:

Piers Corbyn defies categorisation. But let's try. He's a left-wing physicist turned political activist and councillor, turned conspiracy theorist and maverick weather forecaster.

— The Independent, Is there trouble ahead for Jeremy Corbyn? Enter sibling Piers, the wacky weatherman..., 13 August 2015

Jeremy Corbyn's conspiracy theorist brother is staging a protest against the 'new normal' in Lewisham, claiming coronavirus is a hoax linked to 5G masts.

— News Shopper, Jeremy Corbyn's conspiracy theorist brother is staging a protest against the 'new normal' in Lewisham, claiming coronavirus is a hoax linked to 5G masts., 8 July 2020

Huh? Of course a conspiracy theorist is someone who believes in a conspiracy theory. Cambridge Dictionary defines a conspiracy theorist as “ someone who believes in a conspiracy theory (= the idea that an event or situation is the result of a secret plan made by powerful people)“.--LeftiePete (talk) 20:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Why is The Independent article not sufficient enough? Corbyn is for the most part only mentioned in newspaper articles. What more do you want?--LeftiePete (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi LeftiePete and thank you for the question. The Independent is not by itself sufficient because Wikipedia is an aggregate of reliable sources and there are dozens of sources which discuss Piers Corbyn in depth, many present in the article's current version. In the first sentence of the article, we only discuss the traits characterised by sources consistently and repeatedly. Otherwise editors could cherry-pick their favourite adjectives to describe people across our biography articles based on one source out of hundreds and the loudest voice would win. This is why we need multiple sources. There are two things we need to mention a fact in Wikipedia: (1) that it is true; (2) that is is due. If the latter can be established then I'll support the description. I note that you provide a News Shopper source above (you've missed an "S") but this is a local source, which confers less weight upon the source than a national newspaper with wide circulation. We need very strong weight indeed to mention something in the first sentence. — Bilorv (talk) 22:06, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

::::::::Well the user Meters reverted my edit to the article because he/she claims that denying something does not make someone a conspiracy theorist. But, that is not what Corbyn only does. A conspiracy theorist is someone who believes in a conspiracy. As The Independent article points out about Corbyn’s views on climate change, “He believes humans have no role in climate change and that the Met Office, media and "corrupt scientists" are "brainwashing" the public as part of a Qatar-run conspiracy to keep oil prices high.“ Thus, he believes in a conspiracy so he is a conspiracy theorist! That article is from 2015 so it’s not like his recent statements and claims about COVID-19 that have made people describe him as a “conspiracy theorist”, it is because he has believed in conspiracies for a long time. However, Corbyn isn’t really as well known as his brother, but since his recent debate on TV, he has been in the media quite a bit. And, since that debate, people have (accurately) described him as a “conspiracy theorist” because he does believe in various conspiracy theories about COVID-19. As Piers Morgan said, Corbyn relies on “conspiracy theorist wackjob nonsense”. Which other people attended the anti-lockdown rally he helped to organise which resulted in him being arrested and fined? Well one person who attended the rally was none other than the conspiracy theorist David Icke. Have you watched the debate on Good Morning Britain? If not, I advise you to because after watching that debate you will agree that it’s not cherry-picking to describe Corbyn as a “conspiracy theorist”. Because of that recent debate, you will find that more and more authors and reporters will describe him as a “conspiracy theorist”.--LeftiePete (talk) 23:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

That is correct. Simply denying something does not make one a conspiracy theorist. One may, for example, not believe that global warming is caused by humans, or even that it exists at all, without believing that there is a conspiracy behind the theory. When you made your edit you gave no references and made no mention of other activities. And associating with conspiracy theorists does not make one a conspiracy theorist either. Meters (talk) 03:04, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

My position is my own, not that of another person. Note the two criteria I gave that we need to mention a fact. I do not dispute the first criterion. The man is a conspiracy theorist, plain and simple. This is not sufficient for it to be appropriate to call him a conspiracy theorist in the first sentence of the Wikipedia article about him. If you still don't understand my argument, re-read my comment above and try to summarise my argument in one sentence and I can either confirm that you are correct or clarify points you are unclear on. I don't want to hear more about Good Morning Britain because my own opinion is already that the man is a conspiracy theorist. — Bilorv (talk) 12:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

A quick Google search shows that some writers are now including “conspiracy theorist Piers Corbyn” in the headlines of their articles. I suspect that he’s going to become more and more known for this rather than his earlier climate change denial due to how many people watch Good Morning Britain and the debate has been covered in all of the main newspapers and local newspapers in the UK.--LeftiePete (talk) 00:00, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

@Meters: I didn’t edit the article and add “conspiracy theorist” because Corbyn denies climate change. Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with Corbyn’s views on climate change and COVID-19. It is correct to describe him as a “conspiracy theorist” because he believes in conspiracies about those two subjects.--LeftiePete (talk) 11:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Then you will have no issue giving four or five examples for us to review. — Bilorv (talk) 12:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

There are three sources in the article which already refer to him believing in conspiracies regarding COVID-19. The Independent article which was referenced earlier shows that he has been described as a “conspiracy theorist” as early as 2015 because of his belief in various conspiracies regarding climate change. With regards to his belief in various conspiracy theories about COVID-19, he has been mentioned by the BBC as early as May when he started helping to organise anti-lockdown protests:

Glastonbury 5G report 'hijacked by conspiracy theorists'

Similarly, all of the other main newspapers have mentioned him and his participation in peddling conspiracy theories about COVID-19 and helping to organise anti-lockdown protests:

Piers Corbyn charged with breaching lockdown rules on two occasions

Who is Jeremy Corbyn's brother Piers? Mask protests, climate denial and support for a no-deal Brexit

Coronavirus protests: Jeremy Corbyn's brother among protesters arrested at Hyde Park 'mass gathering'

Corbyn’s brother among 23 charged with offences at London protests during lockdown

Anti-lockdown, anti-vaccine and anti-mask protesters crowd London's Trafalgar Square

Note that the last source states clearly, “Key speakers at the event included conspiracy theorists David Icke and Piers Corbyn.”--LeftiePete (talk) 14:47, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. These are all reliable independent sources and they are relevant. The BBC headline is a quote, not in the BBC's words, but the image caption says he shared conspiracy theories and the prose says "Piers Corbyn [...] led an anti-lockdown protest [...] where slogans against 5G were shouted". The Telegraph sources are paywalled so I'm afraid I cannot see beyond the now-established fact that Corbyn took part in conspiracy theorist demonstrations. The fourth source is pretty reasonable evidence IMO and the last two explicitly call him a conspiracy theorist directly, in The Independent's own words. On the strength of these sources combined, I'm weakly in favour of including this in the first sentence. I am strongly in favour of including a brief mention of Corbyn promoting conspiracy theories related to COVID-19 in the lead. I also note that one of our sections was called "Controversial views", which is not how we talk about fringe pseudoscience that no serious subject experts agree with. I've changed it to "Conspiracy theories promoted" for the time being but maybe somebody has an idea of a less clunky way to word that. — Bilorv (talk) 18:22, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

"Promotion of conspiracy theories" -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:56, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Very simple; no idea how this didn't occur to me. Changed and thanks! — Bilorv (talk) 22:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Excellent to see that that article has been improved. Given that the lede mentions Corbyn’s climate denial and support for a no-deal Brexit, should there be a brief mention about his beliefs in various conspiracy theories about COVID-19??--LeftiePete (talk) 10:58, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Not at the moment. It is not one of the most notable aspects of his life yet. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:50, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

I do view it as worth a mention in the lead given the number of sources we have about it, but my editorial preference has always been for slightly longer leads than most editors prefer. — Bilorv (talk) 15:29, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I think we've got enough consensus now to reintroduce the "conspiracy theorist" description, which applies to his climate change denial and COVID-19 claims, the former of which constitutes a large part of his notability. I've added it back, with the sources bundled together. We could likely make more use of these sources in the rest of the article too. — Bilorv (talk) 15:29, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone make this page semi-protected? I’ve had to revert a couple of times edits by people only using IP addresses.--LeftiePete (talk) 20:25, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

You can make a request at WP:RPP for temporary semi-protection if you believe it is warranted. — Bilorv (talk) 21:15, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

Uh-oh, someone has been editing the article and tried to subtly change “conspiracy theories” to “alternative narratives” without providing any reliable sources for that claim. It’s very simple, declaring that COVID-19 is a “hoax” is a conspiracy theory, not an “alternative narrative”. Nothing Corbyn has said about COVID-19 has been an “alternative narrative”; on the contrary, he has repeatedly declared it to be a “hoax” and has given various ridiculous explanations for such an absurd statement.--LeftiePete (talk) 09:02, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

@Bilorv: I’ve requested for the article to be semi-protected. The IP vandalism is becoming tiresome.--LeftiePete (talk) 16:23, 27 September 2020 (UTC) strike comments by another sock of User:English Patriot Man -- Meters (talk) 02:41, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I think this is reasonable. I've been rethinking whether protection is necessary over the past week, as the conspiracy theorists don't seem to have thinned out (as they sometimes do after an article version becomes stable). I've commented on the request in agreement. — Bilorv (talk) 17:47, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

In a video posted on Facebook on 8 Jan 2021, on his policital organisation's page @stopnewnormaluk, Corbyn claims that 'The New World Order' is imposing restrictions on and controlling people's lives. Is his promulgation here, and elsewhere [particularly on his now restricted Twitter stream], of the 'New World Order' not a demonstration that he is a Conspiracy Theorist? https://www.facebook.com/stopnewnormaluk/videos/2515129672123634 JohnFrancis 11/01/21 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.97.5.229 (talk • contribs) 12:09, 11 January 2021 (UTC) Apologies for not knowing how to add my signature, the edit above, regarding Corbyn's video on Facebook was mine (JohnFrancis61 (talk) 21:46, 19 January 2021 (UTC))

Lots of aggressive political language in the article, more suitable for a political attack rather than a reference work

There is a lot of aggressive political language in the article - for example "conspiracy theorist", "false", "discredited" and so on. A reference article should give the opinions of the person and give the opinions of their opponents (with links to both), and then leave the reader to make up their own mind. A reference article should not be a polemical political, and personal, attack.2A02:C7E:1CC3:8A00:BD99:D637:A5D9:284A (talk) 14:11, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia:Fringe theories and Wikipedia:Reliable sources and other policy documents. In articles about individuals like Piers Corbyn, the mainstream account must be included and the fringe nature of his opinions made clear. Thus the words and terms you find objectionable are entirely legitimate in discussing someone like Piers Corbyn. Philip Cross (talk) 14:36, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Your suggestion would go against policies like WP:RS, WP:GEVAL, WP:ABOUTSELF, etc. There is nothing personal about a summary of reliable sources. If you believe a source fails WP:BLPRS, or is being misrepresented, please be specific, as article talk pages are not for the general discussion of the topic, but to improve the article (WP:NOTFORUM). You are also welcome to suggest additional sources, if they contradict the current ones. Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 09:40, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

We report on facts. If someone claims $\pi$ equals 3.2 and another claims that it doesn't (not a hypothetical), we report the correct fact, and state whether each person is correct. Same for climate change and COVID-19. — Bilorv (talk) 10:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

That is false. WIkipedia is know for it's "verifiability, not truth" stance, so no. Stryker Genesis (talk) 14:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

True. But we do follow reliable sources, which results in the same outcome in the cases of pi, COVID and climate change. Corbyn's opinions about the latter two still lose. (I don't know his opinion on pi.) --Hob Gadling (talk) 18:34, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth is an essay, clarifying the intent of wording removed from the policy more than nine years ago! Congrats to all for long memories. . . dave souza, talk 19:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Thatcher and the miners' strike

The current text says:

"Corbyn criticised Margaret Thatcher's acceptance of the fact of anthropogenic global warming (also saying that she later recanted her position) around the time of the 1984–85 miners' strike, judging it a disingenuous attempt to justify shutting down coal mines.[40]". The reference is to this article in the Observer.

The suggestion Thatcher accepted global warming around the time of the miners' strike, and used it to justify pit closures, is incorrect. There is no record of Thatcher mentioning global warming before the late 80s - I believe her first public reference was the Royal Society speech in 1988. So either this quote needs to be contextualised (making clear that the connection between the strike and global warming is an assertion of Corbyn's) or, perhaps more sensibly, the text should be deleted - it's a minor and easily falsified conspiracy theory.

Bob (talk) 12:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

No-one has done anything about your suggestion, which seems sensible. I have found a good source which refutes Corbyn's idea that Thatcher used climate change to justify running down the coal industry (from the Wales Institute of Social and Economic Research and Data) so rather than deleting the reference this will serve to contextualise it. BobBadg (talk) 18:55, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 September 2022

The page states this individual's OCCUPATION in the right hand side box as "Weather forecaster, businessman, anti-vaccination activist and conspiracy theorist". An occupation, by definition is a "a job or profession". While he may certainly be a forecaster or a businessman, it's questionable to include "anti-vaccination activist" as an occupation and even more questionable to include "conspiracy theorist" as an occupation.

I suggest removing "anti-vaccination activist and conspiracy theorist" entirely as neither is a job or profession this person holds.

His beliefs are addressed in the section that is dedicated to his beliefs. If you want to argue him being vocal on numerous issues makes him an "activist" then replace "anti-vaccination activist and conspiracy theorist" with "activist"... as his publicly known beliefs are not limited to matters related to vaccination. 100.35.180.73 (talk) 16:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. I don't necessarily disagree, but this will be contentious, and should be discussed beforehand. Hopefully some of the hundred or so talk page watchers will provide some input. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:44, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Looks like Ohnoitsjamie took care of it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 May 2023

Change 'Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, he has been a prominent proponent of conspiracy theories. He has described SARS-CoV-2 as a "hoax", frequently campaigned against lockdowns and against COVID-19 vaccines, and has described COVID-19 vaccines as dangerous. Corbyn has been arrested on several occasions for partaking of protests against public health laws, and for calling on supporters to commit violent acts against members of Parliament' to 'Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, he was a prominent proponent of conspiracy theories. He described SARS-CoV-2 as a "hoax", frequently campaigned against lockdowns and against COVID-19 vaccines, and described COVID-19 vaccines as dangerous. Corbyn was arrested on several occasions for partaking of protests against public health laws, and for calling on supporters to commit violent acts against members of Parliament' Zawdaw (talk) 19:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done AnnaMankad (talk) 02:13, 23 May 2023 (UTC)