Talk:Etzel Cardeña

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Etzel Cardeña. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110930214511/http://www.salongk.se/artiklar/import/2006/9/7/4470/index.xml to http://www.salongk.se/artiklar/import/2006/9/7/4470/index.xml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

POV
The claim in this article is that ESP is being proven using science. Really? News to me. RobP (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

edit notes
Improved the article somewhat by removing uncited and 'not noteable' material, still needs more and better citations. The discussion to delete is still very relevant IMO. Without proving the existence of and hopefully citing RS (that aren't just broken links) it is difficult for me to justify keeping this article on the grounds of notability. Endercase (talk) 16:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Due to the reversion of my edit without discussion on the talk page I have weighed in at the deletion !vote about the article. Endercase (talk)
 * I don't think you can have tried very hard to cite any of this material before just removing it. I have added citations for most of it. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

WP:FRINGE
The article gives weight to Cardeña's fringe "expressed views" but omits any mainstream reception, analysis, or context. As a WP:FRINGEBLP, we could apply sources such as Arthur S. Reber and James E. Alcock as well as Steven Novella per WP:PARITY. - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)