Talk:List of UFO organizations

Israeli UFO Research Organization
Representatives of The Israeli UFO Research Organization had tried creating an article about themselves a few times in the English and Hebrew Wikipedias and it was deleted every time with the expected explanation of "non-notable group". (Two times i was the deleting admin.)

I tried to be as fair as i could towards them and requested a list of sources that would prove notability. Their representative emailed me a list of links to some websites. Most of them are self-published and wouldn't cut WP:RS requirements. Some of them are interviews in Hebrew on rather popular programs on Israeli TV and radio; in my opinion, it is not something that proves notability, but maybe in the ufology world such things are considered notable.

One link, though, appeared potentially reliable: http://www.ufocasebook.com/2008c/euraconvention.html

Since i don't know almost anything about ufology, i ask for your assistance: is the website ufocasebook.com considered a reliable source in the ufology community? I see that it is linked from many UFO-related articles, so i presume that it is not complete garbage. Would that article be enough for having an article about that organization or at least a mentioning it in this list?

Thanks in advance for your assistance. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Canada Representation
Could someone review www.tesacan.org - The Experiencer Support Association in Canada, and add them to this list for Canada? They investigate UFOs and put out reports annually. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:fea8:7cde:e360:c80c:79aa:497a:677d (talk • contribs) 19:56, December 10, 2020 (UTC)
 * . The organization doesn't seem to be notable. If it's notable enough to merit its own Wikipedia article (and there isn't one at the moment) then it can be included in this list article. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Scientific Coalition For UAP Studies (USA)
The Scientific Coalition For UAP Studies:

Notability:

Chantern15 (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * If nobody has an objection, I'll make this edit. Feel free to revert changes.Chantern15 (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * I have removed the inline external links per WP:NOTDIR. ~Anachronist (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * , This group is not notable as Wikipedia defines it. Sources that quote a member of the group do not establish notability - we would need independent, reliable sources that include substantial information about the group itself. MrOllie (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Such as?Chantern15 (talk) 12:58, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * , Please read WP:GNG, it is spelled out there. - MrOllie (talk) 13:02, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * So do I need to find independent books which mention the SCUAP and ICER?Chantern15 (talk) 13:17, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15

International Coalition For Extraterrestrial Research (34 countries/International)
The International Coalition For Extraterrestrial Research:

Notability:

34 Countries:

Chantern15 (talk) 21:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * If nobody has an objection, I'll make this edit. Feel free to revert changes.Chantern15 (talk) 11:04, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * I didn't revert but I have removed the external link per WP:NOTDIR. Also see WP:WTAF. ~Anachronist (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2021 (UTC)


 * You will note that each and every other organization in this list has an enWiki article, and so too should any new listings. I encourage you to do as implied by Anachronist above: first write articles about the organizations you want to include here, and then add them to this list. Writing an article might at first seem daunting, but you can do it! Go to WP:YFA to learn how. There is certainly no rush to do so. Otherwise per WP:NOTDIR and WP:WTAF your off-format additions could be reverted. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 12:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks guys, I appreciate the effort and info!Chantern15 (talk) 12:37, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * , This group is not notable as Wikipedia defines it. Press releases or sources that quote a member of the group do not establish notability - we would need independent, reliable sources that include substantial information about the group itself. MrOllie (talk) 12:48, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Such as?Chantern15 (talk) 12:58, 25 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * See WP:GNG (or better still, WP:CORP) as spelled out above. Sources you find shouldn't just "mention" the organization. Sources should provide significant coverage of the organization.
 * In other words, write the article about the organization first, and make sure it passes WP:CORP notability guidelines so it isn't deleted. Then it can be listed here. List articles on Wikipedia aren't indiscriminate lists. They generally list things that are notable; that is, things that merit their own stand-alone articles. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay, that's fair.106.215.127.75 (talk) 03:03, 30 August 2021 (UTC)Chantern15
 * I don't know if I want to go through all the trouble of creating new articles about ***ufo*** organizations, only to have them deleted for not having enough appropriate references.Chantern15 (talk) 02:38, 27 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15
 * As a new editor, you have chosen to limit yourself to the WP:FRINGE topic area where appropriate sourcing, weight, attribution, etc. can be complex, nuanced, and counterintuitive to the newcomer. IMO, it's better to learn the ropes on noncontroversial articles first. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Why take the easy way out? :)Chantern15 (talk) 02:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15
 * That's fine. But do you understand why The International Coalition For Extraterrestrial Research, and organizations like it, are not included on this page? JoJo Anthrax (talk) 00:44, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I understand, lists on Wikipedia are not exhaustive lists, they are only lists of notable items (although I imagine that this definition changes over time too), articles require appropriate sources to not be deleted, especially when it comes to fringe topics, etc. Although Wikipedia itself has many, many rules, open to interpretation, bureaucracy and other things, oh well. At some point when they become famous enough, somebody else can make the article if they have all the appropriate references (independent books) and then I can just do the simple task of adding them, or somebody else can, considering being an editor on Wikipedia is a full time job and it's weighted towards those who're already here for a long time and know how to navigate its bureaucracy. Atleast these organizations are listed in the talk page, so somebody else can, as mentioned earlier, can pick them up where I left off. Or if the entries on this talk page get deleted, perhaps their fame will carry them to be mentioned. Just another organization for the list which got deleted earlier, OPUS. That ignore all rules rule must be great, but I imagine that it too must have restrictions to prevent its misuse. Best to leave such vast bureaucracies such as Wikipedia to those who have the experiential seniority and bypassing techniques to get things done, even if it leads to the encyclopedia evolving slowly over time to reflect all views to be NPOV. But considering the way DeathLibrarian couldn't get things done, what hope do I have? So to speak. Best stop talking now before I get reminded of WP: NOTFORUM and WP: DEBATE again. Maybe I should throw around WP: IGNOREALLRULES more often. But then I'll get reminded of WP: BLUDGEON for using it  too often. Gotta love bureaucracies. :)Chantern15 (talk) 02:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15

Should we add "non-governemental" to the title or remove "non-governmental" from the lead?
Apokrif (talk) 14:45, 4 March 2022 (UTC)