Talk:Ammons haunting case

shadowandact.com
I have removed the source "shadowandact.com" and material cited to it. Upon closer examination, it is a user-generated content site, and so not a WP:RS for facts. Further discussion at User_talk:Tkmcguire1. - LuckyLouie (talk) 03:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Skepticism section is almost as long as the main article
That seems unfair, although technically allowed. In theory we could increase that section to account for 90% of the content of the page, and through sheer volume of counter-claims to the case, this would appear to readers be more trustworthy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.198.160.79 (talk) 05:32, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * See the encyclopedia's WP:FRINGE policy. Wikipedia is a WP:MAINSTREAM encyclopedia. We can't give equal weight to supernatural beliefs and fringe views (and spirit possession, ghosts, demons, etc. are definitely fringe views). - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2019 (UTC)