tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post1134669317445600176..comments2024-03-09T00:22:04.859-08:00Comments on Did It Really Happen?: The Covert Wikipedia UFO Wars Continue to RageTim Heberthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04816425882305963295noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post-4301106233582337482013-07-01T19:04:19.710-07:002013-07-01T19:04:19.710-07:00The problem with "letting the reader decide&q...The problem with "letting the reader decide" is that people want to give the conspiracy point of view of UFOlogy sources equal credibility with reality-based views. Thankfully, Wikipedia has a fringe theories policy that prevents folks like Brad Steiger from being authoritiative sources for the UFO articles.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post-76618887311952902722013-06-21T11:40:37.402-07:002013-06-21T11:40:37.402-07:00Purrlgurrl,
Welcome to my dark and dank curiosity...Purrlgurrl,<br /><br />Welcome to my dark and dank curiosity shop! A while back, Wikipedia did use "alleged" in describing the Oscar Flight incident, but over time the story appeared to have grown as a foregone conclusion that Salas story was true and UFO(s) had knocked off alert all ten of Oscar's ICBMs. I believe that Salas was made up to have been an actual eye witness, which is/was preposterous due to his being 60 to 90 feet underground.<br /><br />But your point is well taken. The use of "alleged" would provide the neutral point of view. <br /><br />Tim Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04816425882305963295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post-13155856757969883832013-06-21T10:33:34.294-07:002013-06-21T10:33:34.294-07:00Wouldn't it be nice if Wikipedia would just pr...Wouldn't it be nice if Wikipedia would just proactively insert the word "alleged" in these types of stories, letting the reader make up his or her mind about the veracity of the material contained? <br /><br />Or Wikipedia could simply require that any piece of information that can't be substantially documented by an author be labeled as "alleged" in the piece. Of course, a Roswell piece would have the word "alleged" in every sentence, likely multiple times (LOL). <br /><br />But, I would think that such a rigorous practice might shield Wikipedia from some of the intense criticism it routinely and deservedly gets.purrlgurrlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06519835482606629362noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post-67562713955088959102013-06-20T07:58:06.273-07:002013-06-20T07:58:06.273-07:00Tim, thanks for the comment. I second your opinio...Tim, thanks for the comment. I second your opinion on how wiki should operate through the UFO "minefield." I've always believe that an alternative view point should be presented, that is, if there is one, to any Wiki UFO article.<br /><br />You may find this odd coming from me, but I think the UFO angle gives color to the myths and folklore of the ICBM history.Tim Heberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04816425882305963295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7811150598222033655.post-36838039981971187662013-06-20T06:46:38.484-07:002013-06-20T06:46:38.484-07:00Interesting comments. Some time ago (5-6 years?),...Interesting comments. Some time ago (5-6 years?), I was approaced by somebody trying to rewrite the Wiki entry on Roswell. They were trying to write from a neutral point of view but proponents kept trying to jump in and change the entry. I chose to stay clear of the whole thing as I get tired of arguing about "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin", which is where this usually ends up. A wiki entry should be from a neutral perspective IMO. Proclaiming Salas and Hastings to be hoaxers may be a bit harsh. However, there is evidence that their version of events is not accurate. Simply listing the "facts" (I use this term loosely) is probably the best way to do it and then let the reader decide. Salas' story should be told and then problems with that story (shifting flights over the years, no documentation, lack of any confirmation, confusing of others with echo flight, etc) should be listed. The same should be done with the Echo flight story. Trying to be neutral is hard in such a subject but, for wiki, I think it is important. Tim Printyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06115389684481839803noreply@blogger.com