# Talk:Plandemic

In the 2nd paragraph, there is the sentence "The video also contributed to the increasing rebellion against health protocols." This is vague and seems like it should be backed up by a credible source. Who says it contributed to the increasing rebellion? By how much did it increase? Is there an article explaining this rebellion we're referring to?
Am I wrong? I don't have a Wikipedia account or know how all of this works. Thank you. 50.237.68.146 (talk) 21:47, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

The second paragraph is part of what we call the lede, basically the introduction to the topic. The lede itself does not require citations, as it's meant only to summarize the cited contents of the rest of the article. In this case, the citation is in the third paragraph of the release section. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 22:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
This is a good explanation. In the release section, the most relevant piece of text backing that claim up is "noting that it might have been a major contributor to the lack of compliance towards health protocols". (Emphasis added by me.) Is "might have been" enough to back that up?
If you go to the article it cites, the exact text is as follows:
"Suppose Plandemic had been released right before January 2021, or maybe a day or a week before a major public vaccination? We can now show that disinformation spread would be much harder to gatekeep due to the decentralized nature of information diffusion online, and that, consequently, a significant proportion of the public might resist public health policies. Policy makers, public health officials, and medical information gatekeepers do not yet have the appropriate tools at their disposal to combat these disinformation campaigns, as was the case with Plandemic." (Emphasis added by me.)
The authors are discussing what might have happened if Planedemic had been released at a different time. It seems like a big leap from that sentence to a blanket, apparently factual statement that it definitely "contributed to the increasing rebellion against health protocols." Even if that is just the lede, and thank you for the explanation, it doesn't seem to be sufficiently backed up by the third paragraph of the release section or the article that paragraph cites.
Again, I could be wrong; I'm just going off of what I was taught in college about citing factual claims. Thanks for your time. 67.190.168.101 (talk) 22:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Apologies for the late reply. I have added plausibly to the lede to reflect the plausible nature of the impact as described in the source. GeraldWL 15:34, 19 June 2024 (UTC)