# Talk:David Icke

reptilian shapeshifters is linked to the wiki article on reptiles and there is no reference there to reptilian shapeshifters. 142.163.195.205 (talk) 00:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done I broke it into two wikilinks. One to Reptile and the other to Shapeshifting. Cullen328 (talk) 23:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

the dream was released this year
can someone update the "selected works" 2A00:23C5:14B9:C601:E084:5224:E0F5:4E83 (talk) 22:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Cullen328 (talk) 23:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 Done Softlavender (talk) 09:54, 17 November 2023 (UTC)

The Short description generally follows the basic information contained in the lead of the article. He is not much known as a footballer. Icke seems to be best known as a conspiracy theorist. This article starts David Vaughan Icke (...) is an English conspiracy theorist and ... so a Short description of English conspiracy theorist (born 1952) is reasonable. — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 11:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Agree. Slatersteven (talk) 11:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Also agree, he never hit the big time as a footballer, was somewhat more successful as a BBC sports presenter, and then really hit the big time with his alternative (cough cough) theories.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 11:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
yup Bon courage (talk) 15:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Note as this was started today, at least give it until tomorrow to decide if there is a consensus. Slatersteven (talk) 14:46, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

No disagreement. Restored to English conspiracy theorist (born 1952) — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 20:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Agree per points mentioned above. He is primarily known as a conspiracy theorist. Carlstak (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

@Hemiauchenia you reverted my edit, and said see BLP. You're gonna have to be a lot more specific than that. 
Delectopierre (talk) 03:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Saying "x is an antisemite" in Wikivoice is a very serious and potentially libellous accusation, and it is always best to err on the side of caution by attributing it. Take it to WP:BLPN if you care enough. By my reading of what scholars of new religious movements and that ilk have said of Icke (and they are probably the most qualified to understand him), they tend to see his claims regarding the protocols of Zion as part of the smorgasbord of his conspiracy worldview, and that his claims about reptilians are sincere and not merely a code for Jews. Hemiauchenia (talk) 03:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
Re: lizard people being divorced from antisemitism: first of all, it is a common dog whistle. Secondly, here is a screengrab from one of his youtube videos prior to it getting nuked (preserved in this article). You will notice that the lizard people have stars of david and israeli and american flags on them. Please share a link to research that refutes this.
Re: antisemite vs. antisemitic opinions:
He was banned from entering Australia and the Netherlands for his antisemitism. He's been called an antisemite in the news , had academics call him antisemitic, and the Center for Countering Digital Hate produced a 25 page report that stated, in part:
"These features form a funnel structure that directs curious viewers from popular channels that regularly present Icke as an expert speaker on coronavirus, through to Icke’s own videos that play into current trends on hate and misinformation, arriving finally at the antisemitism that underpins all of Icke’s work."
If that's not an antisemite, I don't know what is. I hear you about the need to err on the side of caution, but I think it's also important to ask: what kind of caution? Of course we need to be careful not to expose wikipedia to litigation.
BUT we also need to use caution that we don't downplay hate.
Perhaps I will go to WP:BLPN. I'll have to think about it. Delectopierre (talk) 04:33, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLP says BLPs should be written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone and Do not label people with contentious labels, loaded language, or terms that lack precision unless a person is commonly described that way in reliable sources I simply don't think your version passes this. I think we can say "a number of academics and journalists have described his claims about elders of Zion and the Rothschilds as antisemitic" but "Icke is an antisemite" is going too far. Hemiauchenia (talk) 04:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
@Hemiauchenia Also removed from Reptilian conspiracy theory pending BLPN discussion.
Awshort (talk) 07:07, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Icke&diff=prev&oldid=1319633327
Saying that critics allege that he is antisemitic is unacceptable bothsidesism. This wording would be appropriate if there were an actual dispute but it doesn't look like there are any reliable sources that dispute it. NPOV also forbids us from inventing a dispute where there is none. Since my version did not say "Icke is an antinemite", nor did it exclude his denial, I'm unclear why it was reverted. (t · c) buidhe 01:43, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
It excluded his explicit denial for the "reptilians" being a code for Jews. Icke may be a figure that many regard as odious, but that doesn't mean BLP policy shouldn't apply to him. See also Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Words_to_watch#Contentious_labels. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Also your claim that it doesn't look like there are any reliable sources that dispute [that Icke is an antisemite] shows you have not carefully read the article. The article cites "Robertson, David G. (2016). UFOs, Conspiracy Theories and the New Age" as opposing the view that Icke is an antisemite. I think there are two different claims here that should be distinguished. 1. That Icke is an antisemite. 2. That Icke's conspiracist worldview is largely based on/a euphemism for antisemitism, and that the reptilians are a deliberate code for Jews. #2 is definitely contentious and should not be presented as fact. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:08, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
I still think the bothsidesism is both bad style and uninformative for our readers, compared to a possible rephrase that all sources would probably agree on, such as "Icke's writings have often been analyzed as containing antisemitic tropes".Even if it's possible Icke did not set out to deliberately promote antisemitism, his entire conspiracy theory is based on pre-existing classical antisemitic themes. (t · c) buidhe 06:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Icke's behaviour can be identified with a variety of patterns and concepts. The most salient and most descriptive, I suggest, is "psychotic". His thinking is characteristically disordered. It uses and distorts a wide variety of concepts, most of them pretty fringe in the first place, and quite a few from the old tropes around hatred of Jews. Nevertheless, his disturbances of abstract thinking mean that he probably doesn't make connections that may be obvious to others. I support buidhe's suggestion of something along the lines of "Icke's writings have often been analyzed as containing antisemitic tropes". It's plentifully referenceable, and it avoids ascribing to him conceptual connections that we cannot evidence and that, I suggest, he probably isn't making himself, indeed may not be capable of making. Sylvia de Jonge (talk) 21:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

This article includes a helpful photo of a random street in Ryde on the Isle of Wight simply because David Icke lives there. While this is no doubt useful to people who live in jungles, on other planets, or in some equally exotic location and therefore have no idea what a "town" is (but somehow understand the rest of the article), might it perhaps be even more useful to have a picture of one of these Reptoid critters which are central to Icke's worldview? I know readers can find one easily enough by googling, but a definitive image of an Icke-approved Reptoid in the article itself would be nice. After all, Wikipedia does self-identify as an encyclopedia. 86.130.66.107 (talk) 14:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)

I removed the photo of a generic street in Ryde because it doesn't have enough relevance to be worth using in this article. As for a request of an image of a reptoid, this would probably have to meet WP:NFCC.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 14:27, 28 March 2025 (UTC)