Revision as of 00:34, 24 November 2008 editDennis Brown (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions69,230 edits →Redirect: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:42, 24 November 2008 edit undoජපස (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers60,473 edits →Redirect: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
While I appreciate other editors being bold, I don't think that changing this article to a redirect needs to happen without serious discussion. It has just gotten off a contentious AFD. <font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><strong>] <small>(]) (])</small></strong></font> 00:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC) | While I appreciate other editors being bold, I don't think that changing this article to a redirect needs to happen without serious discussion. It has just gotten off a contentious AFD. <font face="tahoma, sans-serif"><strong>] <small>(]) (])</small></strong></font> 00:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC) | ||
If anyone thinks this redirect is inappropriate, let them make their opinions known here. If no objects are made in the next 96 hours, I will reinstate the redirect. ] (]) 00:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 00:42, 24 November 2008
This article was nominated for deletion on 12 November 2008 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
Paranormal Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Cryptozoology Unassessed | ||||||||||
|
Alleged extraterrestrials?
I have a couple of questions about this page. At the moment, it seems to document only cryptids associated solely (or mainly) with outer space. So, should this page also include creatures not originally attributed to alien activity that have since been alleged of alien origins (such as shadow people, fairies, chupacabras and Spring-Heeled Jack)? Also, what about various the real humans who have been accused of being aliens by conspiracy theorists? Should they get a mention? RobbieG 14:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- I think it maybe best to stick just with alleged extraterrestrials, and not go into creatures that are not originally attributed to alien activity (start a separate article for them)... not a good idea to add humans who have been accused of being aliens (start a separate article for them) ... just stick with alleged extraterrestrials within alien activity (:O) -Nima Baghaei 18:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- leave out Cryptid creatures that are not extraterrestrial and not attributed to alien activity (create a separate article for them if one does not exist) (:O) -Nima Baghaei 18:27, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- What about cryptid creatures that some people believe to be extraterrestrial and some people attribute to alien activity, whilst some people believe in them but don't think they're aliens? El Chupacabra would be a prime example. RobbieG 17:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- if their Grouping in the Paranormalcreatures infobox says extraterrestrial because some people believe they are attributed to alien activity, add them in (:O) -Nima Baghaei 18:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, in the case of Chupacabras, the infobox doesn't say anything of the sort, but the article itself does. RobbieG 18:17, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Add extraterrestrial to the Grouping and add that creature to the list (:O) -Nima Baghaei 18:19, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- spring heeled jack is a human, not a ufo-related entity (:OP (:O) -Nima Baghaei 19:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- moth man not a UFO-related entity, and Men in black is moved to List of government responses to UFOs (:O) -Nima Baghaei 19:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Don't you think this might be a bit narrow? Also, whatever Mothman is, he's not human, and Spring Heeled Jack has been alleged to be an extraterrestrial, as his article states. If this list is for solely UFO related entities, we can remove the Dover Demon and the Rods too (although I suppose one could argue that the rods themselves are UFOs). RobbieG 20:30, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- stick with solely UFO related entities, create a separate list article for these other creatures (:O) -Nima Baghaei 20:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Other aliens
- Andromedans
- Borg aliens
Source is MAAR. Will place this.65.173.105.131 (talk) 18:44, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- IF you have seen Star Trek:TNG and Star Trek: Voyager, that wil give you an idea what a Borg alien looks like.65.173.105.131 (talk) 18:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Andromedans: Battlefield Earth
I have a list of websites, dozens of them and it is all the same: The claim is that the Andromedan aliens have "told all other aliens to LEAVE Earth and the Sol solar system voluntarily or involuntarily. Either way, they're leaving. The reptile aliens and their allies are'nt leaving, so there will be WAR here when these aliens arrive. The battle would be a cross between the Biblical Book Of Revealations and Return of the Jedi, meaning that not only would Earth be "invaded", it'll be a battleground, with Humanity caught in the middle of it, with nowhere to run. There is references to this battle on the Andromedan talk page. Google SEARCH: Alien Races/ Alien Species for more. Done that myself.65.173.105.131 (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
- Is this related to the novel, Battlefield Earth, or some other work of fiction? --Jenny 06:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- As far as I'm aware, it's meant to be in real life. The "Battlefield Earth" part of the section header seems to be there probably just because it seemed to fit with the topic. ~ Ghelæ contribs 07:27, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- There are a lot of people around who have the ability to maintain a website but are unable to tell the difference between reality and what they see on the television. However, if we can get decent sources (that Washington Post story about Eisenhower is what I consider a pretty good source) then I think they can go in). --Jenny 07:49, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Better sources
I've removed some sourcing that struck me as worse than useless--crank websites, about.com and some kind of talk radio show. I haven't removed the entries themselves, but I think I'd like to see some sourcing for those comparable to what we have for the others: mainstream newspaper and magazine articles, published books, and so on. Anybody can make a story up and put it on a website or tell Jeff Rense about it. I think we should look for better sourcing than that. --Jenny 07:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- What's wrong with About.com? Are they less of an expert on UFO related entities than the New York Times and USA Today? I think someone should look into the removal of references to make sure they were in fact "wose than useless". I hope you aren't a government agent trying to crush open discussion of possible alien activity. Or are you yourself working with these alien entities? ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Mothman.jpg
The image Image:Mothman.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. --23:01, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
Report
This is a very interesting list, however it is rediculous and flawed. I could find out more from my homeworld. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ratstail91 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Redirect
While I appreciate other editors being bold, I don't think that changing this article to a redirect needs to happen without serious discussion. It has just gotten off a contentious AFD. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 00:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
If anyone thinks this redirect is inappropriate, let them make their opinions known here. If no objects are made in the next 96 hours, I will reinstate the redirect. ScienceApologist (talk) 00:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Categories: