NPOV dispute 

Just so this isn't lost by the two suspiciously tangential talk page sections added just above this one, here is a minor sample of the current NPOV dispute over this article. In my interpretation, the early October version of this article was rewritten with a load of weasle words which downplay criticm of the phrase's usage, and subtly play up the dubious narrative genre. More mention of the possibility that the narrative genre is disinformation is needed. The article should be explicitly clear that labeling an allegation a "conspiracy theory" is an attempt at dubiousness through association with the narrative genre. Also, "generally and "commonly considered" in the intro are incomplete and need to be fixed for NPOV. The new version of the article seems to be saying a lot less than the old version, we should go through the diff line by line. Did someone ever justify those massive changes? Though some of them were good.  T