Talk:Samuele Bacchiocchi

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Conspiracy theory

I tagged the conspiracy theory as

non-neutral because it seems to be a biased account of events written by someone with a vested interest. Is it important enough to show up in any independent reliable sources? If no, I suggest it be removed altogether. --Flex (talk/contribs) 14:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

The

non-neutral is unwarrented due to the nature and subjectivity of conspiracy theories themselves. I do not have a vested interest. I wish to present other conspiracy theories that have been well documented other than the one given. [[User:hop_goblin (talk/13:10, 11 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hop goblin (talkcontribs
)

Wikipedia does not judge the truth-value of conspiracy theories or any other point. Rather, it merely outlines the different arguments and those who represent them, on a disputed point (
due weight. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
I do think the minority POV suspicious of Bacchiocchi is maybe worth including, but only very briefly per due weight. Hence I have shortened it considerably. I kept the Alberto Rivera reference, as he is the most prominent source apparently – he is notable enough to have his own Wikipedia article. However he is a very questionable source. I justify the inclusion only on the basis that a small but visible segment actually believe this. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 07:23, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What Colin MacLaurin did seems fine to me; it puts the source in its likely proper perspective. By the way, is there any way we could find a photo of Mr. Bacchiocchi? Kansan (talk) 03:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Samuele Bacchiocchi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:55, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]