Talk:Pro-Truth Pledge

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

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disclosure[edit]

I have edited this page. I may be considered to have a conflict of interest. I have taken the Pro-Truth Pledge and have communicated by email with Gleb Tsipursky. I am interested in the subject and support its goals but I am not editing at the request of or on behalf of anyone else. If anyone has any concerns or questions for me, please let me know, and/or feel free to revert my changes if they appear to be inappropriate. Thank you. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 19:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

COI's on this page and the reliability of sources[edit]

Both the editors who have made substantial contributions to this page have disclosed COI's. Fine, the bigger issue from my perspective is that the author of this pledge has a history of using undisclosed paid promoters across the internet and aggressive self-promotion (see discussion at the deletion of his AFD). Reading the sources that this article relies on they all follow a similar format. A few hundred words about a topical political issue, then an link to the pro-truth pledge and an interview with its author. The sources are mostly the websites of otherwise respected publications - but the similarity of the format and the content leads me to suspect they are not independent, instead they are more like sophisticated forms of paid content, the author agreeing to put forward an article to a set script clearly led by Gleb. So although the sources are at first glance from respectable publications I think more close reading and interrogation is required to establish if they meet the requirements of WP:N AlasdairEdits (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. Firstly, off-wiki opinions and people who express them don't mean they are banned here if their cites are legit.

Secondly, if several websites include the same link to a social cause, it is outrageous to assume they were paid.

Thirdly, you said, "Although the sources are at first glance from respectable publications..." NO. they are respectable publications (like Scientific American), period. When they promote the Pledge and let the Pledge site use their logos, they are vouching for the respectability of the Pledge.

Fourthly, your stalking of this Gleb guy (whom I never heard of) around the internet is chilling.

And finally, you call for "investigation" and "interrogation" of people who run websites that link to the Truth site. I'll let that speak for itself. I don't think I can comment on it and remain civil. Verdana♥Bold 17:04, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]