Talk:Travis Walton incident/Archive 1

More detailed article
I wish this article were laid out in more precise and clear detail Bernie 06:01, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Does the following line from the article contain a mis-print: "and one of few abduction cases where the time allegedly spent in the custody of aliens plays a rather minor role in the overall account." Shouldn't that be "a rather MAJOR role" - in the sense that he was missing for 5 days and seemingly not traceable? Or am I reading the intention of the line wrong? If it's supposed to be "minor' I don;t understand the statement. 167.127.24.25 15:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Fred Sylvanus doesn't seem to exist outside of this incident. Could he and his materials be counterintelligence or a hoax or something along those lines? Hackwrench 21:37, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Given the lack of security on the room and the lack of response after he was discovered, it would seem that the room was an entertainment center at its simplest, a flight similator at its more complex, and given the state of technology, both these days and as projected in holodecks, there's no reason it couldn't be both.

I use password protection on the computer I am working at. The lack of even that much security would suggest that the room is the advanced equivalent of a Playstation 3. Even the Playstation 2 had a password for parental controls on DVD's to keep the kids from watching what they wanted. It is possible that the device has a biometric scanner of some sort and can upon reading the proper biometric profile, control everything. Such biometric devices are relatively trivial and with the technology we have today there are a number of inexpensive USB drives with heavy encryption.


 * WTF are you talking about? Where are you getting holodecks, PS2's and PS3's from?    — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:B:A3C0:7:CCAC:60E1:1431:DA6D (talk) 02:32, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

http://www.timeatlas.com/mos/Reviews/Reviews/ClipDrive_Bio_-_A_Safe_and_Secure_Thumb_Drive/ Hackwrench 18:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Given the resources of an interstellar government, that room could have been anything from the equivalent of an entertainment center for a teenager to the lieutenant's office on an aircraft carrier.

He saw three types of saucers or unknown ships at the base. Flat, round and oval as related in document that mentions Walton. Teslafieldmachine (talk) 18:41, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Name of article
Just a little thing... wouldn't it make more sense for this article to be named Travis Walton alien abduction? Especially when it's linked to from other pages (such as Snowflake, Arizona), it appears to be referring to a kidnapping. Bird of paradox 18:23, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

How about basics like his date of birth, profession, etc... ?


 * See my comment under, below. &mdash;QuicksilverT @ 08:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

PAGE MOVED per discussion below. -GTBacchus(talk) 02:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC) Travis Walton abduction → Travis Walton — Currently, the redirect goes the other way, but seeing as this is the man's only claim to fame, I assume having it as such would make more sense. $$\sim$$ Lenoxus " * " 19:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Add  # Support   or   # Oppose   on a new line in the appropriate section followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~ .  Please remember that this survey is not a vote, and please provide an explanation for your recommendation.

Survey - in support of the move

 * 1)  Support  - since the ufo incident is also a biography, and since Travis walton is redirected here, lets move this article to Travis Walton.  But we have to make sure all the pages that link here get redirected to the new article name (:O) -Nima Baghaei (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 2) Support, if that his is only claim to fame, then it makes sense to just have the article at his name, IMO. Recury 19:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Add any additional comments:
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

A Song About the Claim
There was a somewhat popular Country / Western song about the claimed event at the time, though I do not recall the singer or all of the words. From memory:

I was chopping wood near Heber, Arizona

When something weird was hanging in the sky

I stepped up to take a closer look at it

And a blue light zapped me right between the eyes

The next thing I woke up aboard a space ship

They took my hand and showed me all around

They came not to condemn me

But merely to observe my ways

I wish they'd found a better place

To set me down.

Chorus:

Why'd they have to let me out in Tucson?

They could have shown me Jupiter or Mars!

Why'd they have to let me out in Tucson?

I guess they've never seen the women in these bars.

I found a phone and tried to call my brother

I was intercepted by the FBI

The sheriff and the doctor

And the Secret Service guys

Are convinced that they're convinced

I'm telling lies

The song also mentioned "I could have seen the dark side of the Moon" and other such space alien adventures, but I have not heard the song for over TWO DECADES. The last time I tried to find the lyrics to the song (a year or so ago) on the Internet I failed to find any such song. --Desertphile (talk) 02:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Polygraph disambiguation
There are two problematical sentences in the article regarding the use of polygraphs in the story. The first is ""Excepting Dallis (who had not completed his exam, thus rendering it invalid)...." which makes no sense. All polygraph tests are invalid, as polygraphs and polygraph examiners perform no better than chance at determining veracity. The second problem is the sentence "Travis would later take and pass two additional polygraph exams...." which also has no meaning. How does one "pass" a polygraph exam?

I suggest "(who had not completed his exam, thus rendering it invalid)" in the first sentence be removed since it makes no sense to add it; I also suggest someone explain what "pass" means in the vernacular of polygraph pseudo-science.

It would also be a good idea to also note in the article that polygraphs are useless. --Desertphile (talk) 03:45, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Monetary Gain?
Does anyone know how much was made from the book/movie & his various interviews/UFO convention Appearances? Thanks:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.35.95 (talk) 22:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Travis Walton a Mormon?
this link infers/claims that Travis Walton was/is Mormon. This is true / correct, can anyone confirm this source or add mention with this as source for the article? 67.42.0.13 (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * He's lapsed. He talks about it in the book, but someone keeps on deleting that category from his page.--MacRùsgail (talk) 23:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Understandable since it's not discussed within the article itself. Categories should be supported by the article text. DonIago (talk) 15:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Why isn't in the text? In fact, why don't you go and write it. Could do with some more biographical information other than the invident...--MacRùsgail (talk) 17:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If I had a reliable source I might do so. If you have one, you are welcome to add pertinent text. DonIago (talk) 14:49, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I was expecting you to do it. Or whoever keeps on removing the category. If they have energy enough to do that, they can also do this! --MacRùsgail (talk) 19:01, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure why you're expecting another editor to add information that you're invested in seeing included...but it's been my experience that if you wait for another editor to make a change you'd like to see made, you might end up waiting a long time. You're welcome to be bold and make the appropriate changes yourself. :) DonIago (talk) 20:18, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


 * If you've got the energy to keep removing stuff, you've got the energy to get off your backside and look for it.--MacRùsgail (talk) 14:35, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Yes, according to Travis's book, Fire in the Sky, he has Mormon roots. Referring to Snowflake residents on first moving to Snowflake Travis wrote, "I never told anyone, but my Mormon roots were as deep as anyones. They didn't know it but, going way back, I'm actually related to some of them. My great-great-grandfather, Joseph Walton, was among the pioneer families to settle the Utah Valley with Brigham Young." I plan to work on this page as I get time. I am very new on here so be patient with me. I currently live in Snowflake, AZ. MorenciMarkeen (talk) 23:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Matheson?
As much as I think the whole Walton affair is a load of bull, I really think that the included parts in which "Matheson states/argues/claims" are not put in the right places It should be in the aftermath section, all of it, and not palced in the middle of Walton's explanation of the soc-called alien craft nonsense. Or we could remove it entirely. Any thought? 64.234.0.101 (talk) 03:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Unrelated link
I have removed an unrelated link from the Books section :
 * 1993 Lie detector test shows Travis Walton spoke the truth - conducted during preparation for the 1993 film adaptation of Walton's experiences, also titled Fire in the Sky.

It was marked as broken as of March 2009, and now it is even worse, as it redirect to something unrelated. --77.198.58.37 (talk) 16:44, 23 September 2010 (UTC) (Hibou57)

Birth date
During an on-air interview with Linda Moulton Howe and George Noory on the Coast to Coast AM radio show on February 24-25, 2011, Travis Walton confirmed he had celebrated his 58th birthday a couple of weeks earlier. That would make his birth year 2011-58 = 1953. Subtracting "a couple of weeks" (14 days) from February 24 would put the date about February 10, with an uncertainty of plus or minus a few days. Linda and Travis also commented on the wildly inaccurate date currently shown in the Wikipedia article (April 23 1957). This information can be verified by anyone who has a subscription to the archived Coast to Coast AM shows. It may be possible to source additional material to pinpoint the exact date, but knowing at least the year and month is no worse than the biographical information available for many Wikipedia entries, and better than some. &mdash;QuicksilverT @ 19:03, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Klass and CSICOP
It would not surprise me if Klass and CSICOP had tried to mislead Walton and the polygraph. Klass and Kurtz (the former head of CSICOP) can be rather ill-tempered, insensitive people. Frankly, they can be jerks in person. It's the reason they do what they do and not spend their time investigating food safety or some other thing like the IMF & the Third World… as real compassionate people who have a thirst for truth, justice, and honest inquiry would be more inclined towards. Not everone has a need to expose truth, but those who do and aren't jerks tend towards constructive investigations and skepticism that positively affect humanity. What Klass and Kurtz do has little real contribution. They'd rather prey on honest people who have been traumatized, while they puff themselves up as guardians of The Truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.65.115.103 (talk) 04:37, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

One thing I will give the late Mr. Klass credit for, is that he actually WENT to some of the UFO conferences. Most debunkers stay at home and issue a priori proclamations about things. I lost every shred of respect I'd had for the CSI-Clowns after reading the about the "sTarbaby" shenanigans involving Dennis Rawlins. Tonybaldacci (talk) 23:52, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Distance traveled
What was the distance between where he was "abducted" and the gas station? TacfuJecan (talk) 05:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Accurate coordinates for his abduction seem difficult to find, but it appears to be in the vicinity of  . He was not released at the phone booth / gas station, but on the open road west of town, exactly at , based on a youtube video where he identifies the site. The distance would be about 17.1 km as the crow flies. Then he ran into town, and made the call from the booth, located at  , an additional distance of 1.3 km. JMK (talk) 13:03, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

The Waltons
When mentioning Duane Walton and Travis Walton in the same paragraph could someone please not use just the last name given that there are 6 Walton children. It might be clear to whomever wrote this article but to someone who does not have knowledge of this subject I find it confusing which Walton you are referring to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:B:A3C0:7:CCAC:60E1:1431:DA6D (talk) 02:35, 28 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Can you specify the paragraph or paragraphs you're referring to? Nightscream (talk) 04:41, 28 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I agree. It's very confusing to read "Duane and Walton" over and over, interspersed with "Duane Walton." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.205.179.220 (talk) 05:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Nightscream (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Unsourced material
Below material has been tagged for needing sources since 2011. Feel free to reinsert with appropriate references. DonIago (talk) 14:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Why Is This Article Littered With the Name Terry Matheson?
I fail to understand why the viewpoint of a writer unassociated with the case is implicitly controlling the narrative, especially when the facts of Walton's missing time are so well documented. There are absolutely no circumstances that justify a running critique of Walton's own reported narrative. It should stand on its own, with citations where possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.25.13.90 (talk) 17:38, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Other editors have made the same point. There is no justification for the lead-in to the section on "Walton in the UFO" consisting in Matheson's commentary. It is being removed, along with other intrusive instances of Matheson's narrative hijacking. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.25.13.90 (talk) 17:41, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Fringe Theories Noticeboard
There is currently a discussion on the Fringe Theories Noticeboard regarding this article. Interested editors are invited to join the discussion here. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The discussion was archived here: WP:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard/Archive_45. 5Q5 (talk) 12:22, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Symbolic art.
A "lie detector" like used here, should be considered unserious. Really just as unserious as the story itself. However a little knowledge about symbolic art, such as that drawn by users of hallucinogens, should give the necessary information. The cover of "Fire in the sky" with the beam, looks like hallucinogenic art, drawn by others aswell. Such as the "game over" image, from the game "Shadow of the beast", by "Psygnosis", wellknown users of hallucinogens. http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Rr4r2ysztc8/maxresdefault.jpg

The aliens look like "tree-spirits" often drawn by hallucinogen-users, and he is a logger, and the hallucinogenic amanita muscaria grows by trees. Maybe they all are "trippers" wanting to scam the world. Unfortunately the "acid-trip" usually makes the user schizophrenic, so he doesn´t quite know morality, the wrongs of lying extremely, or looking completely out of place to normal people. The diagnosis of schizophrenia actually coined by Jung, based on his own use, and disturbance.

This is not uncommon. A lot of "ufos" are actually symbolically shaped. Aliens, such as "greys" are symbolically drawn, as to represent "coming from outer space", yet with the look of a beast, because they are often claimed to be "superior to humans". Which ofcourse is only a facist. And the same lack of morality.

Hitler also uses this type of totemic art. Look at the symbols nazis use. They are really idols to be worshipped, like totems, but the sharp eye will recognize severe deviance in this art. So really if possible it should be common knowledge. "Idolatry is of Satan" - The God of Monotheism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.211.164.8 (talk) 07:15, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Without a reliable source this is all original research and inappropriate for inclusion. DonIago (talk) 13:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Archiving
This talk page is a little long with a lot of stale threads. I am going to set up ClueBot III so it will auto archive threads that have had no activity for 90 days. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:02, 27 March 2015 (UTC)


 * There appear to be no links to the archive.-MacRùsgail (talk) 17:02, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ClueBot isn't good for this. Also someone did a page move and left the archives at the old name location. I fixed the problems and replaced ClueBot with Miszabot. GigglesnortHotel (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Too Much Clark Sourcing, Missing Details
There's missing information in this article, particularly the damning evidence that Travis once told his mother not to worry if he were ever "abducted by a UFO" because he would "return safely," as well as the tape-recorded conversation in which his crew mates confidently proclaim that he'll be coming back and is having the experience of his life. I've got Clark's encyclopedia and I just finished reading Klass's writeup on this case, but the latter includes various suspicious details that are unmentioned here. I hardly think anyone could believe this case after reading the details that Klass presents; it seems like the writer of this article is using too few sources. 108.171.130.176 (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sources please? Page numbers and quotes? GigglesnortHotel (talk) 17:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Details of his return
There is zero information about the circumstances of Travis's return. One minute he's missing, the next minute he's already returned, but exactly how he returned is never spelt out. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  09:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
 * It was just arranged poorly. I fixed that. GigglesnortHotel (talk) 17:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Discussion
Please discuss your problems with the page here rather than mass deleting and changing sentences to push POV. GigglesnortHotel (talk) 19:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Specifically this "The article is heavily PROFRINGE. many of the sources are fringe and fail RS. There is longstanding consensus that UFO's are a fringe theory." Which sources are fringe? Where is the consensus that UFOs are a fringe theory? The only consensus I've seen is that their existence is undetermined. GigglesnortHotel (talk) 19:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The article has 33 references to "The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial. " I would imagine that this is definitely a fringe source! Theroadislong (talk) 19:50, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This article is a textbook example of a one sided promotion of fringe theories. The sources are so biased that if we deleted all the material referenced to fringe sources we would end up with a stub. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It has been more or less in this state FOR OVER A YEAR, as it was tagged "fringe theories" in Feb 2015. None of you has done a thing to resolve what you seem to think is an urgent issue in all that time? Suddenly, now that I want to remove the tags, you're all up in arms about it? This further supports my statement that the tagging is not meant to inspire someone to fix the issue but to push POV. GigglesnortHotel (talk) 19:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Polygraphs are not reliable, agree about the source, unreliable too. Raquel Baranow (talk) 19:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please do not remove maintenance tags w/o consensus. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah. Tags suck. But here they're needed. Alexbrn (talk) 20:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's hilarious how this has sat tagged for years, now suddenly you guys are all het up about it. When were you lot planning to fix the issues? GigglesnortHotel (talk) 20:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Now seems to be good. -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Question Is there a single cited source that anyone thinks passes WP:RS? -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * There is this EL which links to this PDF of newspaper clippings. Rhoark (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Agreed that UFOlogists and UFO websites are not independent reliable sources. Some possible non-UFO believer sources might be:, , , . I'm sure some digging will unearth more. - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * This article was beyond repair in its previous state. I have stubbed it in the hopes that it will be expanded in an NPOV compliant manner using only reliable sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Looking over the available non-fringe sources the notability is all about the UFO claim rather than the person. There doesn't appear to be enough data to support a WP:BIO article. I suggest this be renamed Travis Walton UFO incident or something similar. - LuckyLouie (talk) 21:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I just added a neutrally-worded version of the abduction claim. It should read better than the old version, even if it is a bit short. MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  22:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I like that. I will just add that we need to be careful that we don't become overly reliant on skeptic sources. That could create its own set of POV issues. I am trying to find some secondary source material from the mainstream press/media.-Ad Orientem (talk) 22:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Stop stealing my lines. ;) MjolnirPants   Tell me all about it.  00:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * It's hard to find mainstream media coverage of the topic that isn't played for sensationalism (example: the Huffington Post piece currently cited takes a credulous tabloid approach to the subject). - LuckyLouie (talk) 22:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

I found quite a few sources on HighBeam Research, we also have this article here on WP, Fire in the Sky, a movie made about his alleged experience, not sure why it's not mentioned, there's also the book he wrote The Walton Experience, here's a couple sources I found pretty easily.-- Isaidnoway (talk)  22:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just a Down-to-Earth Guy; Travis Walton, Sticking By His Extraterrestrial Tale The Washington Post (March 13, 1993)
 * 'FIRE' HAS ITS BRIGHT MOMENTS, BUT MOST OF THE TIME IT FIZZLES The Buffalo News March 13, 1993
 * Don't agree with this clean-up of the article. The truth, and i don't expect otherwise, is that wikipedians 'consensus' is skeptical by nature, and cannot accept anything 'strange' without calling it a 'frige'. Just for curiosity, how much would you take for religion too, as anything is 'fringe' there? Or the 'paranormal' is the only thing that interests wikipedian censorship? I repeat, the article like reduced now is totally pointless, and it was filled with 'skeptical' sources. Is it NOT biased, then? Or wikipedians states cleary that UFO cannot exists, or deleting so much material is still a real censorship and nothing else, made by someone who has an agenda camouflaged by 'reliable source' or similar labels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Promotion of Fringe Theories
A discussion concerning this article has been opened at the Fringe Theories Noticeboard Interested editors are encouraged to join the discussion. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Fringe theories, another name for censorship. Then i'll expect that also the religion will be relegated in the 'fringe theories', or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.11.0.22 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Ummm... no. And this is not the place for debating our policies and guidelines. If you wish to question or challenge WP:FRINGE the place to hold that discussion is on the talk page of that guideline. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:27, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Exact location
Can someone make a map of the site where the Travis Walten UFO incident should have taken place, where he was brought back to earth and all other geographical objects involved in the incident. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:DF:1F02:4388:9FE:FBCA:6258:A66C (talk) 12:48, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Refs in lead
Re, the lead doesn’t strictly require any references since it’s meant to reflect sources already cited in the article body. But in this case the refs were placed in the lead to discourage continual vandalism and claims that the sentence is “uncited”. - LuckyLouie (talk) 14:42, 15 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The Lead indeed requires sources where appropriate, which is determined on a case-by-base basis, as it states at MOS:LEAD, both in (ironically) the last sentence of the Lead section of that page, and then in the citations section, MOS:LEADCIT. Nightscream (talk) 04:04, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Recent near-confession by Mike Rogers
I'm not sure if anyone wants to add this. I prefer to take part in the discussion rather than editing. Recently Travis and Mike got into an arguement on Facebook, and Mike made a statement saying that henceforth he was no longer to be considered a corroborating witness to Travis' abduction, called Travis a liar and threatened to reveal the truth about what happened. About two months later, he retracted this, reaffirmed his support for Travis, and said that his anger had been due to him finding out that Travis was trying to get a remake of Fire in the Sky made without his involvement. In a radio interview, he stated that he had made amends with Travis after Travis agreed to involve him in the film, and unashamedly and excitedly admitted he expects to make millions from it. I don't think you can cite Facebook posts or interviews with YouTube personalities as sources. However, skeptic Robert Shaeffer wrote an article on his blog covering at least some of this.
 * To be clear, even during the two months when he first made the statement and when he retracted it, Mike responded to his followers who asked if he was admitting to a hoax that he still stood by the truthfulness of the portion of the event he and the rest of the crew witnessed, but that he was now skeptical (up until he retracted his statement) that Travis had been abducted because he no longer considered Travis to be an honest person. Nevertheless, he certainly implied that he was harboring a secret about the event that Travis would not want other people to know. DonIago (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:3d08:5d85:6100:4924:b558:ca4d:3fc5 (talk • contribs)
 * I think we'd need a reliable source to discuss this. "A radio show" isn't very specific, but may be citable if more specifics are available. I don't think Facebook or YouTube or blogs are a great idea though. DonIago (talk) 14:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

"Copyvio"?
@User:Bilby: What is "copyvio" about those two external links? 

Now the only external link we have is WP:PROFRINGE. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:01, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * FWIW, that's not how you ping a user. I'll go ahead and do so now. DonIago (talk) 18:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The Robert Staffer link is to a site which is reposting newspaper articles without any sign that they are doing so with permission. Per WP:LINKVIO, that would be contributory infringement under US copyright law. In regard to Skeptoid, Skeptoid is self published, so would come under WP:BLPEL. - Bilby (talk) 23:38, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki at its worst "sceptics reception" ???
The nice way to rate this representation of the TW. abduction is to say it has been badly "researched" by the staff at wiki ... the truth IS out there ... but the lies are in your head. Do your own research on T.W. ... 2A00:23C5:FD92:D301:798A:7F95:866C:711 (talk) 22:33, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you suggesting changes to the article? And if so, what changes? DonIago (talk) 22:41, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * "The staff at wiki" doesn't research articles. If you believe there are corrections to be made to this article, please make them.The andf (talk) 14:48, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * FWIW, the IP hasn't edited since November, so it's doubtful we'll hear back from them. This seems to be a drive-by comment. DonIago (talk) 15:13, 15 February 2022 (UTC)