Talk:Tim Dinsdale

Pro-fringe content and primary sources
Most experts that have evaluated the Dinsdale film consider the object a boat. For example British vertebrate palaeontologist Darren Naish has written that "our view of Dinsdale’s film today is that it isn’t impressive and almost certainly doesn’t depict a monster... The object he filmed was no giant unknown aquatic animal, but a boat." Chemical Engineer deliberately removed this reference.

Chemical Engineer also added Dinsdale's book and a biography written by his relative  20 times to the article, these are primary sources and undue weight to fringe views.

Lastly, Ronald Binns has dismissed Dinsdale's "evidences" including the object in his film as a boat. Binns has been added to the article as source but none of his skeptical comments about Dinsdale have been included. This seems to be bad cherry-picking. Psychologist Guy (talk) 00:46, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Tim Dinsdale is significant, not because he was right but because of the effect he had, which is the key comment by Binns. The article is a biography not a critique of his belief (which I think is mistaken).  Notability is asserted by the obituaries.  On basic facts about his life it would be hard to exclude a biography by his son.  Other sources such as newspapers reporting the same things are certainly not from some totally independent source but from either Dinsdale.  I do not agree that they add weight to Dinsdale's views, which I have minimized.  He took some film which he was convinced was of the monster, as he himself stated hence referenced, and sightings which he interpreted the same way, then spent much of his life in a fruitless pursuit.  This is the prime fact.  The Tetrapod podcast text is essentially a favourable view of the book as a biography (citing it extensively), but argues against Tim Dinsdale's interpretations (as many other have done).  I did not see anything which would add to a biography other than the opinion "One of the most important characters as goes popularisation of the monster and promotion of its ostensible reality remains aeronautical engineer Tim Dinsdale (1924-1987)."


 * Taking a neutral point of view I have tried to neither support nor deny his opinions, only to record the life with as much precise reference as I could.Chemical Engineer (talk) 21:10, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Please note that Wikipedia is not censored, nor is it a promotional platform. If it is covered by reliable sources, we cover it. Warts and all. &#58;bloodofox: (talk) 23:10, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree. That is what I always try to do. Chemical Engineer (talk) 18:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)