User talk:Jesuspectre

February 2020
Hello, I'm Coffee. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person   on Thomas John Flanagan, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! — Coffee //  have a ☕️ //  beans  // 05:58, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thank you! I'll add external sources.

What's completely laughable is that the Thomas John Flannagan page is completely deluged by self-referenced footnotes to external pages written by the very people making the comments! It's hilarious and unethical.

Testing of Thomas John's Mediumship in Controlled Settings
Dr. Gary Schwartz of the University of Arizona tested Thomas John's mediumship in a blind study. Schwartz verified that Thomas John was able to verbalize specific details of sitters' deceased relatives with no knowledge of the them beforehand.

Brian Smith, a grief counselor and author of Grief to Growth, video-recorded a blind reading where Thomas John verbalized specific details of deceased relatives for a randomly selected participant with no knowledge of them beforehand. During the reading, the participant was restricted to answering Thomas John's questions with a simple "yes" or "no" in an effort to curb accusations of "cold reading" where psychic mediums fish for answers using back and forth conversation.

Recent edits
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Thomas John Flanagan. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. I would also recommend reading the following policy regarding proper sourcing on Wikipedia: WP:RS. As you can see from reading this, many of the sources you have attempted to use are not considered to be reliable. Isingness (talk) 21:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

Exasperating and unfair.

Why is Psychic Medium in quotes?
The career of a psychic medium is well established, and shouldn't be in quotations. The reason why the author of this article, using multiple email addresses, put the career title in quotations is to besmirch the veracity of the title and to mock it. You wouldn't put quotations around astrologer, even though that career title has skepticism swirling around it. Why do you do it with the title of psychic medium? This is just one example of the many instances of bias in this article. Can't wait to hear your response.