Talk:Psychotronic weapons

Mindjustice "Issue"
The only source from the initial description taken from mindjustice is Thomas, Timothy (Spring 1998). "The Mind has No Firewall". Parameters. pp. 82–92. Obviously using a single source from another site does not constitute "extensive sources taken from a lobby organization." There is no reason to be flagging that paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damonthesis (talk • contribs) 20:11, 30 April 2013‎

Norseen
I think my analysis of Norseen's description of the current state of a "parallel" program to psychotronic research being done under contract at Lockheed Martin is fairly accurate. I'm certainly open to modifying that paragraph, though it is one of the only legitimate sources of current research into the technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Damonthesis (talk • contribs) 20:11, 30 April 2013‎


 * You've placed lots and lots of weight on bits and pieces from certain sources, especially those aggregated and claimed as "evidence" by mind control conspiracy groups (such as mindjustice.org). For example, you've got the article stating that psychotronic weapons actually exist and are functional ("the class of weapons are used to modify the thought process of humans") based on reports in Russian media from the Cold War. As for Norseen et al, you need sources that explicitly discuss psychotronic weapons. You can't just lump together concepts that you feel are related and weave them into a collection of "evidence" that supports whatever it is you want the article to say. Based on the existing WP:SYNTHESIS, WP:FRINGE, and WP:UNDUE issues, I'm not sure this article would survive a deletion discussion, which may be in its near future. - LuckyLouie (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The Norseen sources make no mention of psychotronics at all. It is blatant original research to include them. All of the content that was in this article was either correctly removed from the psychotronics article or properly belongs in the psychotronics article. If you recreate the article, I will nominate it for deletion. GDallimore (Talk) 20:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Once we have defined psychotronics, there is a significant amount of information which falls under the definition. Just because they do not use the exact same word does not mean the information is not relevant.  It is the proper name of a Russian mind control program, specifically using directed energy and radiation.  It is nearly the only term to describe such weapons, and therefore any counterpart from another country would fall under the same term, or at least merit discussion on this page. The psychotronics article has absolutely nothing to do with the Russian Intelligence program, or the product of that program, which is exactly what is being discussed here.  To boil down 50 years of Russian research to the work of one "parapsychology" scientist, is ludicrous. Damonthesis (talk) 22:43, 30 April 2013 (UTC)