Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
// request.cf · coarse context
A page that knows where it met you.
Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.
A: The consensus is that the first Plandemic is a video, whilst the second Plandemic is a film. The first video is merely a 26-minute interview with several fair use clips, hence there is not much originality, and a video is a sufficient description. However, Plandemic: Indoctornation is an interview combined with original clips, one that can be seen in various documentaries. As documentaries don't have to be of real information, it is safe to describe Indoctornation as a film.
Q: Why is Plandemic deemed misinformation on Wikipedia?
A: Wikipedia is a summary of information shared by reliable sources. According to reliable sources, most of which had extra fact-checking, Plandemic is misinformation due to its baseless claims regarding COVID-19 and virology, as well as several other topics including politics and Judy Mikovits. Many of the claims stated within it, as well as Indoctornation, have been discovered to be untrue, and is reasonably backed up. There's no personal or political agenda.
Q: Why does this article not state any praises regarding Plandemic and only talk about the bad stuff?
A: Actually, this article does, as an attempt to present a wide view on the subject. Several conspiratorial reviews of the film are shown, and not once do either sides get justified here: this is an encyclopedia, and Wikipedia only reports what sources say, not trying to give superiority over a party. In the end, it's up to the viewers to decide what they think of a topic, even Plandemic. Nevertheless, Plandemic being misinformation is a fact, not an opinion.
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. 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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject COVID-19, a project to coordinate efforts to improve all COVID-19-related articles. If you would like to help, you are invited to join and to participate in project discussions.COVID-19Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19Template:WikiProject COVID-19COVID-19
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia'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 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 Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Latest comment: 5 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The reason for this request is that the content on the former Health Feedback URL (healthfeedback.org) has been replaced with spam. ChaetoLv (talk) 01:45, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply