Talk:Water fuel cell/Archive 21

Stan Meyer's own article
This is a proposal for Stan's own article instead of being direct here to water free energy. Please post your thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by O1001010 (talk • contribs) 23:22, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it only makes sense if you know of something else noteworthy about him besides this. Personally, I didn't find anything else, and even his own bio page really doesn't mention anything else. If that's the case, a separate page would just be a stub pointing to this article, and there would be endless arguments about where to put the legal and conspiracy stuff, so it would be more trouble than it's worth.Prebys (talk) 23:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I been doing research on Stan and I found http://waterfuelcell.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=216 contains huge amount of info, points all generally agreed by the free energy community. I will organize those 35 points and try to creat a short article and then expand from there. I think someone pioneer as Stan deserves his own page. But I repsect your opinions hence why I posted here first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by O1001010 (talk • contribs) 08:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Be warned: you will be wasting your time because he is only notable for the WFC so any separate article will get merged or deleted quite quickly, and you won't enjoy that. If free energy ever became accepted by mainstream science, that would be different because the whole world would know his name.  But that has not happened (and very likely never will). Man with two legs (talk) 11:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * As I said, when you read the bio, it's (1) born, (2) invented water fuel cell. The majority of the stuff in the list is unverified  and unverifiable (contacted by "Arabs", or his visits to the Pentagon, for example). The fact that he was a Christian and "paranoid but not crazy" (debatable) just doesn't make him newsworthy. If you base an article on that page, it would be nothing more than a laundry list of Meyer's claims, and certainly a good candidate for deletion.I'm afraid "generally agreed by the free energy community" doesn't carry a heck of a lot of weight in matters of fact. Prebys (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)