From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

List of quacks?[edit]

I notice ZooGuard has edited out what was admittedly becoming a long list of quacks with the comment " if the "see also" section starts looking like a category, it should become a category." and I can see the point but now the article seems a little bit of a dead end.

I toyed with the idea of adding a direct "see also" link to the category: woo-meisters / pseudoscience promotors but I'm thinking it might be nice to have a catagory: Quacks or something a touch more specific.

Any thoughts? --Longdog (talk) 15:29, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

The alternative is to put those links in a "Quacks" or "List of quacks" or "Notable quacks" section, with a brief description of each one. It will also serve as an additional justification for the existence of this article.--ZooGuard (talk) 19:45, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Can bioduck and geoduck be brought into the discussion? (... And if you want Quarkery, go to Finnegans Wake and the Large Hadron Collider). (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2015 (UTC)


Question, does the word "quacksalver" relate in any way to the word "quicksilver" (which is sometimes used to refer to mercury, and IIRC originated from alchemy)? Or is it just a coincidence? I seem to recall hearing that some snake-oil formulations did in fact contain Mercury (along with just about anything else). If there's any connection between the two terms, that should be mentioned, and even if there's no connection a disambiguation link might be useful. --Phantomreader42 (talk) 16:38, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Dictionary etymologies say the same as the article - it comes from Dutch and means something like "salve peddler".--ZooGuard (talk) 16:42, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


Does not the tag 'Though not a stub by pure word count, this article lacks depth of content' define quackery itself? Anna Livia (talk) 19:01, 19 March 2019 (UTC)