Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 21:16, 22 February 2021

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the JP Sears article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Spirituality This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spirituality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of spirituality-related subjects on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpiritualityWikipedia:WikiProject SpiritualityTemplate:WikiProject SpiritualitySpirituality ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Comedy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comedy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of comedy on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComedyWikipedia:WikiProject ComedyTemplate:WikiProject ComedyComedy ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. 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 Misplaced Pages. 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Alternative views This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative viewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative viewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative viewsAlternative views ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. United States This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the JP Sears article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months

Yes, JP is anti-vaccine...

...or pro-safe-vaccine, or pro-informed consent etc.

In 2017 he published a video saying "I want to be heavily vaccinated so I can be protected from the diseases that I’ve been told to be extremely afraid of."

He recently pushed a WHO/Big pharma conspiracy on his Instagram.

In April 2019, Sears posted a video about vaccines with the by-line “Are you pro vaccine or an anti-vaxxer? Either way, I set the record straight on vaccines.” In the video Sears peddles the false conspiracy theory that Bill Gates didn’t vaccinate his children (because elites), which is false.

There are no too many news articles that highlight the pseudoscientific side of JP Sears so it appears the mere mention of being anti-vaxx should be fine... — The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭 13:20, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

JP Sears is a parody/troll personality. Nothing from primary sources (esp. his channel) can be considered reliable. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:15, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/clown-prince-wellness —PaleoNeonate – 23:56, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Maybe something here? https://www.elephantjournal.com/2020/12/the-trouble-with-jp-sears-influencers/ Alex 21:47, 24 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexbbard (talk • contribs)

That is an anonymous blog post and cannot be used (WP:BLPRS). It seems difficult to find mainstream news that discuss Sears (I found a few from 2016-2017 that weren't relevant here). In general that's a sign of lack of notability. Or maybe it takes some time for them to report about more recent events. I found https://www.dailywire.com/news/facebook-threatens-to-unpublish-comedian-jp-sears-after-mocking-covid-19-lockdowns yet the few WP:RSN threads that discuss it appear to quote a Snopes entry that questions its reliability. Then I read in its own voice: "Democrats’ hypocrisy, and the overall self-righteousness exhhibited by the pro-lockdown enthusiasts." displaying ignorance/disregard for the science involved, and the article mostly publishes censorship-outcry quotes... I found better articles in skeptic magazines but they're also rarely usable in BLPs. —PaleoNeonate – 20:42, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

The only WP:RS-compliant source I've found on this guy so far is this one: https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/clown-prince-wellness :bloodofox: (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

References

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvrJ6irVMKQ&feature=youtu.be&t=110
2. https://www.instagram.com/p/B_a5P3xlYkA/
3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8W8QQcde7D4
4. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2018/may/02/yournewswirecom/Website-falsely-claims-Bill-Gates-refused-to-vacci/

Notability

I can't seem to find anything resembling wp:sigcov or evidence that Sears's work has earned "considerable attention", or "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.", or "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.", or even "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.", as described by guidelines at wp:entertainer. I'm not going to AFD this yet, but I think these problems may warrant a future AfD. BrxBrx(talk) 20:39, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

He's notable and passes GN guidelines, as the new edits have demonstrated. The article was just lacking in content and refs before. Thanks for bringing this up anyway. Bezrat (talk) 03:16, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

JP's publicist dropped him.

Sounds True dropped him because he lied about the terrorist attack on the capitol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.15.4.47 (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Is there a reliable source that reported about this? Thanks, —PaleoNeonate – 15:08, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I found out from a tweet with an excerpt of a statement from Sounds True. I'm not sure how reliable that is, but you can check the cache of Sounds True's page for JP. The present version is gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadib100 (talk • contribs) 19:09, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

True or not, there's also the matter of WP:DUE Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:03, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

JP Sears is not a conspiracy theorist

Sears' videos are oriented to humor. He doesn't spread conspiracy theories. There's some kind of bias in those who created this entry. Alejo81 (talk) 04:26, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

He's a conspiracy theorist. I've seen people claim that it's all satire, but they misunderstand what he says. It doesn't matter if JP says, "X is good," when he actually means "X is bad," when actually X is a completely false statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadib100 (talk • contribs) 09:17, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

conspiracy theorist in the lede

Sears is not primarily known as a conspiracy theorist in the relms of alex jones and the crazies. I personally have never once heard the term used once, although I dont really follow him.

Put this here per WP:PRESERVE.

, and conspiracy theorist.

If you dont agree run an RFC, or I will this goes all TE bonkers without a lot of sources. This is a BLP after all.

Thanks! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 05:05, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bloodofox: here. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

I also saw your revert. Office for Science and Society is very much a reliable source and Sears's promotion of fringe topics and conspiracy theories by way of his YouTube videos is core to what Sears does. Review Misplaced Pages:Fringe_theories#Treatment_of_living_persons. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bloodofox: thats a primary source. Feel free to discuss below in the rfc and dont edit disputed content that is under RFC Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Note that this user here referred to the article's citation to the Office for Science and Society as follows: "your suggested university is a primary source and laughable". No clue what this guy is going on about with that or what he's up to here, but there's clearly some kind of POV motivation behind this bizarre approach and Misplaced Pages word salad (misuse of "primary source" and "status quo" and whatever "don't dispute content that is under RFC" is supposed to mean). :bloodofox: (talk) 08:19, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

It means follow the wp process and participate in the RFC process that is now underway (below) and WP:AGF as well.Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:24, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

When a Misplaced Pages user starts describing a high-quality source, the Office for Science and Society, as "a primary source and laughable", that user has made it pretty clear where they're coming from—there is no reason to assume otherwise at that point. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

References

1. Jarry, Jonathan (2020-11-19). "The Clown Prince of Wellness". Office for Science and Society. Retrieved 2021-01-18.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
2. Ham, Larissa (15 August 2016). "YouTube comedian or real life coach: who is the real JP Sears?". The Sydney Morning Herald.
3. "JP Sears - Live in Denver". Comedy Works. Retrieved Jan 11, 2021.

RFC on conspiracy theorist in lead

Please consider joining the feedback request service. An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following lists: Society, sports, and culture Biographies Media, the arts, and architecture When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the lists. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

Should ", and conspiracy theorist" be included in the lede? Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:03, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

References

1. Jarry, Jonathan (2020-11-19). "The Clown Prince of Wellness". Office for Science and Society. Retrieved 2021-01-18.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
2. Ham, Larissa (15 August 2016). "YouTube comedian or real life coach: who is the real JP Sears?". The Sydney Morning Herald.
3. "JP Sears - Live in Denver". Comedy Works. Retrieved Jan 11, 2021.

Survey

• No, article subject is primarily known as satirist and makes satire of many subjects. In lede is WP:UNDUE weight it is sufficient to explore in the article and later if it becomes due, we can include it. One of the sources is a university, essentially a primary source. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 08:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

  You need to take a break from editing Misplaced Pages until you have thoroughly reviewed WP:PRIMARY and gained an understanding of what a primary source is. This is fundamental. McGill University's Office for Science and Society (article) is a very high quality source (WP:RS), in this case a secondary source. The article's author is surveying primary sources to produce an analysis. The author, Jonathan Jarry, is not directly involved with these events or the individuals he discusses. Jarry is in fact a scholar, a science communicator. :bloodofox: (talk) 08:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

OK so now we agree it is a blog post by a university employee (or professor)? These statements are the very definition of primary. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Are you trolling or what? Familiarize yourself with WP:PRIMARY. :bloodofox: (talk) 19:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, i tend to patrol controversial BLPs, although I am not sure that is what you meant... Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• In some form - WP:LEAD being a summary of the article body's important points, the conspiracy theories subsection is about 1/3 of the article, amost 1/2 of the body. It's not important if it's "and a conspiracy theorist", "promoted conspiracy theories", etc. —PaleoNeonate – 22:54, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
• No - per WP:NPOV - it's undue for the lead based on the opinion of Jarry. If it's a widely held and significant viewpoint, then I would expect to see that label widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject of this BLP. Jarry's opinion is properly attributed in the body of the article, but I also think too much weight is being given to Jarry's POV with a separate sub-section, one sentence in the career section is enough. If more reliable sources can be found to support that label, then I might change my mind. It appears to me that his notability derives from being a comedian/satirist, not a conspiracy theorist. I'll also note that it shouldn't have been added back to the lead (in any form), as seen here, unattributed, in WP's voice, while this RfC is ongoing. Isaidnoway (talk) 10:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

If you have not already, see Vice source below, which itself cites the Office for Science and Society as a source. :bloodofox: (talk) 02:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Labelling someone as having "promoted conspiracy theories" is not the same as stating that they are a "conspiracy theorist" which is what the vote is about. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:56, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• In some form. The Office for Science and Society is a particularly high-quality source, but Sears's move toward conspiracy theories and right-wing politics is also documented by Vice—who quote the Office for Science and Society article—in the body. As always, Misplaced Pages isn't censored. :bloodofox: (talk) 05:37, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
• No per WP:BLPSTYLE, MOS:LABEL, and WP:NPOV. I thought the Morning Herald article would collaborate the "conspiracy theorist" label, but it does not. We can't state in WP:WIKIVOICE that he's a conspiracy theorist. I still have my doubts about the Office for Science and Society source, but if you're gonna use it at all, then at a minimum it would need attribution (also placing Jarry's POV in the lead seems kinda undue). Hemiauchenia is spot on. I've seen this occur many times on various BLPs where the BLP is labeled as a "conspiracy theorist" in the article, but the sources only state that the BLP had promoted conspiracy theories--not that they were a conspiracy theorist. Someone like Joe Rogan has promoted conspiracy theories before, but that doesn't necessarily make him a conspiracy theorist. Dr. Swag Lord (talk) 05:48, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Dr. Swag Lord: Is this also a vote that the claim "promoted conspiracy theories" should also not be in the lead, as some other commenters are implying? Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• No - per WP:NPOV - Jarry's POV can only be supported if he can provide more valid sources that can be used to ascertain his claims.Sea Ane (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

This vote does not make a distinction between "conspiracy theorist" and "promoted conspiracy theories" The standard for including the former is much higher than the latter. Hemiauchenia (talk) 02:01, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Correct, but the very definition of a conspiracy theorist is one who promotes conspiracy theories, so the standard is the same and it shouldn't have been added to the lead while this RfC is ongoing. When content has been disputed, the onus to achieve consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content. So it shouldn't appear anywhere in the lead, in any form, until consensus has been reached. Isaidnoway (talk) 07:13, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

"the very definition of a conspiracy theorist is one who promotes conspiracy theories, so the standard is the same" No its not. Mainstream sources tend to only label people like Alex Jones and David Icke as outright conspiracy theorists, but are happy to describe others as having promoted conspiracy theories, without outright calling them conspiracy theorists. Hemiauchenia (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Well, using that logic, one has to wonder why Bloodofox added that label in the lead, since the source being used doesn't outright call him a conspiracy theorist. Isaidnoway (talk) 18:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Outside of the restrictions of Misplaced Pages, people whose income involves promoting conspiracy theories—definitely the case for the subject of this article—are known as conspiracy theorists. It's a pretty natural. :bloodofox: (talk) 18:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

2021 report from Vice

Vice has published a report on Sears's transition to conspiracy theories:

• Merlan, Anna. 2021. "Leading New Age Conspiracy Influencers Plan Their Retreat to Utopian Lagoon", January 28, 2021. Online.

This piece follows up on McGill's Office for Science and Society and notes that:

Meanwhile, the comedian JP Sears, one of the reported backers of the Gold Star Oasis, according to Joyous Heart, has undergone a similar shift. Sears was once known for lighthearted videos making fun of the pieties and pretensions of the New Age world; he played a character in YouTube videos who was “ultra spiritual,” very into yoga and deeply insufferable; in character, he also did interviews with outlets like Yoga Journal. ...

But Sears, too, appears increasingly redpilled, producing harder-edged videos mocking lockdowns and other COVID restrictions and increasingly implying those lockdowns are just a pretext to limit human freedom."

The article contains further discussion about Sears, including commentary on Sears's decision to purchase a firearm in November 2020. :bloodofox: (talk) 06:30, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

If there are multiple sources that confirm the conspiracy theories then it would be a good idea to add them to the article. This is a much more reliable source than a university blog. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 06:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

The source this individual is bizarrely referring to as a "university blog" is a 2021 article from McGill University's Office for Science and Society, by any definition a high-quality source and without question well in compliance with WP:RS. @Jtbobwaysf:, take whatever is you're going on about to Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard if you need others to tell you the same. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:20, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Yes, more a public education university project than a blog, —PaleoNeonate – 13:52, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Its a primary source regardless. If the subject really is a conspiracy theorist there will be many sources in RS, no reason to really debate what is or isnt a blog. That fact that the discussion is even going on evidences it isnt RS material for the lede of a BLP, that should be obvious. The comments of this bloodofox user appear to be politically motivated (red-pill, etc). Jtbobwaysf (talk) 03:39, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Confusion on your part about the differences between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources aside, re: "Red-pill,etc"—what on earth are you talking about? That is not a quote from me. :bloodofox: (talk) 05:19, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Bloodofox: - RE: your question above - Yes, I did read the Vice article. According to WP:RSP - There is no consensus on the reliability of Vice Media publications, so I'd be hesitant to say it's a reliable source for a contentious claim in a BLP. The author of the Vice article, a former blogger for Gawker Media, doesn't inspire confidence either, as she was named in a defamation lawsuit in relation to her blogging. And when Richard Bradley wrote a piece about the discredited and retracted Rolling Stone gang-rape story, she called his article a giant ball of shit, and also called Robby Soave an idiot for the story he wrote about the retracted RS article. She later apologized, but her history does call into question her diligence in relation to fact-checking, and reliability as a source for a contentious claim in a BLP. Isaidnoway (talk) 07:24, 22 February 2021 (UTC

The author appears to have worked and written for numerous publications, including Jezebel, and it appears that the libel suit you're talking about resulted in little more than a settlement that involved Jezebel attaching a company's response to the article in question (). She also appears to regularly write about conspirituality topics, which includes the Vice article. I see no red flags in this piece and I'm sure more will be forthcoming about this topic. I recommend you take the source to the WP:RS notice board if you have further concerns about it. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:57, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I have no further concerns, Vice has already been to RSN, and there's no consensus on the reliability of it. RfC participants here can decide for themselves if this specific article is a reliable source to support a contentious claim about the subject of this BLP. In my view, it isn't. Isaidnoway (talk) 10:36, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

• See Misplaced Pages:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#JP Sears and McGill University's Office for Science and Society. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

• Biography articles of living people
• All unassessed articles
• Start-Class biography articles
• WikiProject Biography articles
• Start-Class Spirituality articles
• Unknown-importance Spirituality articles
• Start-Class Comedy articles
• Unknown-importance Comedy articles
• WikiProject Comedy articles
• Start-Class Skepticism articles
• Low-importance Skepticism articles
• WikiProject Skepticism articles
• Start-Class Alternative views articles
• Unknown-importance Alternative views articles
• WikiProject Alternative views articles
• Start-Class United States articles
• Unknown-importance United States articles
• Start-Class United States articles of Unknown-importance
• WikiProject United States articles
• Misplaced Pages requests for comment