![]() |
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Promotion of Fringe Theories
A discussion concerning this article has been opened at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard Interested editors are encouraged to join the discussion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Fringe theories, another name for censorship. Then i'll expect that also the religion will be relegated in the 'fringe theories', or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Ummm... no. And this is not the place for debating our policies and guidelines. If you wish to question or challenge WP:FRINGE the place to hold that discussion is on the talk page of that guideline. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
- Fringe theories, another name for censorship. Then i'll expect that also the religion will be relegated in the 'fringe theories', or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Exact location
Can someone make a map of the site where the Travis Walten UFO incident should have taken place, where he was brought back to earth and all other geographical objects involved in the incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DF:1F02:4388:9FE:FBCA:6258:A66C (talk) 12:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Refs in lead
Re [1], the lead doesn’t strictly require any references since it’s meant to reflect sources already cited in the article body. But in this case the refs were placed in the lead to discourage continual vandalism and claims that the sentence is “uncited”. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- The Lead indeed requires sources where appropriate, which is determined on a case-by-base basis, as it states at MOS:LEAD, both in (ironically) the last sentence of the Lead section of that page, and then in the citations section, MOS:LEADCIT. Nightscream (talk) 04:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
Recent near-confession by Mike Rogers
I'm not sure if anyone wants to add this. I prefer to take part in the discussion rather than editing. Recently Travis and Mike got into an arguement on Facebook, and Mike made a statement saying that henceforth he was no longer to be considered a corroborating witness to Travis' abduction, called Travis a liar and threatened to reveal the truth about what happened. About two months later, he retracted this, reaffirmed his support for Travis, and said that his anger had been due to him finding out that Travis was trying to get a remake of Fire in the Sky made without his involvement. In a radio interview, he stated that he had made amends with Travis after Travis agreed to involve him in the film, and unashamedly and excitedly admitted he expects to make millions from it. I don't think you can cite Facebook posts or interviews with YouTube personalities as sources. However, skeptic Robert Shaeffer wrote an article on his blog covering at least some of this.
- To be clear, even during the two months when he first made the statement and when he retracted it, Mike responded to his followers who asked if he was admitting to a hoax that he still stood by the truthfulness of the portion of the event he and the rest of the crew witnessed, but that he was now skeptical (up until he retracted his statement) that Travis had been abducted because he no longer considered Travis to be an honest person. Nevertheless, he certainly implied that he was harboring a secret about the event that Travis would not want other people to know. DonIago (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3d08:5d85:6100:4924:b558:ca4d:3fc5 (talk • contribs)
- I think we'd need a reliable source to discuss this. "A radio show" isn't very specific, but may be citable if more specifics are available. I don't think Facebook or YouTube or blogs are a great idea though. DonIago (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- To be clear, even during the two months when he first made the statement and when he retracted it, Mike responded to his followers who asked if he was admitting to a hoax that he still stood by the truthfulness of the portion of the event he and the rest of the crew witnessed, but that he was now skeptical (up until he retracted his statement) that Travis had been abducted because he no longer considered Travis to be an honest person. Nevertheless, he certainly implied that he was harboring a secret about the event that Travis would not want other people to know. DonIago (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3d08:5d85:6100:4924:b558:ca4d:3fc5 (talk • contribs)