Talk:Hank Risan

Is this a balanced, verifiable article?
Leaving aside the fact that this article was probably incorrect accepted by an editor who is now banned from editing, I'm concerned that there is no independent scientific basis for the claims made concerning 'Psycho-Acoustic simulations' indeed this paragraph in particular is not independently referenced at all, and so should probably be removed. I think the article needs significant work to put forward a balanced viewpoint, if it is to be retained, but i'd like to get opinions from other editors so starting a discussion here. There are a number of sources of commentary on the case that are not referenced that probably should be - the judge's description of "technobabble and doublespeak" reported at ArsTechnica article is just one such example. Welcome any input --nonsense ferret  20:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I've gone ahead and removed the fluff, IRWolfie- (talk) 15:45, 9 March 2013 (UTC)