User talk:Science Woman

Question
Hello! I see that all of your edits, dating back a year and a half, have been something to promote Christopher Chacon. What is your connection with him? -- MelanieN (talk) 23:27, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

None actually. He is one of a dozen different people with interesting backgrounds that I have been meticulously collecting information on before creating any official posts about them. An associate of mine who is a very grounded and journalist/reporter and also a fact-checker/researcher for a couple info/magazine TV shows collected first-hand facts about Chacon from property owners, management offices and other accurate sources and she was surprised that the facts hadn't ever been noted on Wikipedia. I took it upon myself to do so before anyone else does. Please advise if I did anything incorrect or inaccurate. I have been diligent in preparing my notes before I actually make any significant contributions to Wikipedia and would greatly appreciate your thoughts if I did something inaccurately. Thank you so much in advance for your feedback and time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Science Woman (talk • contribs)
 * Please note that "strangerealms.net" is not considered a WP:RS. Also, if you intend to add material connected with parapsychology to our articles, you may want to review the encyclopedia's WP:FRINGE guideline. For a comprehensive list of editorial policies, see WP:Nutshell. Lastly, you can sign your Talk page postings by typing four tildes, like so: ~ Thanks, - LuckyLouie (talk) 00:31, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh, OK! That's great advice! Thank you so much! It is the website's referenced that uses the parapsychological terms. Unfortunately, the initial sources I obtained for Chacon are from the TV programs which are not accessible to use as references. Unless you know a way that I can... I can go back through those two edits and take that fringe term out, as well as the website that is not considered [WP:RS]. Would that be acceptable? Thanks again for your help! Science Woman (talk) 00:47, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Not quite sure what you mean, but things added to Wikipedia need to be referenced to reliable sources. In this case, Chacon’s pseudoscientific investigations being mentioned on paranormal TV shows is considered trivial and/or WP:UNDUE weight. Ditto for Halloween seasonal, sensational or news-of-the-weird pieces in magazines or websites. Many historic houses (or ships) are claimed to be haunted. Unless there is serious in-depth coverage in independent reliable sources, or there is writing by academic folklorists on the subject, paranormal rumors and superstition are typically not included. - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

The TV programming my associate was assisting and initially drew my attention was not "paranormal TV shows", they were an ABC News segment, an ABC info show and NBC news and Telemundo Network news segments, all reputable programming. I also confirmed my associates facts that Chacon was hired by each property for scientific assessments, it is other sources that muddied and exaggerated the facts into pseudo science. But in the absense of sources to reference for this programming I used these other website sources. Thank you so much again for taking the time to assist me with my first edits. Is it OK if I cantact you in the future to assist me with any future posts that I have difficulty with? Science Woman (talk) 02:27, 29 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Sure, but bear in mind that if your sole objective is to insert Chacon (who openly promotes pseudoscience) into Wikipedia, you may have some tough going. A better plan might be for you to get your feet wet on Wikipedia by making improvements (fixing grammar, formatting text, adding sources, etc.) to articles that have no connection to Chacon, claimed hauntings, parapsychology, UFOs, or other fringe concepts. - LuckyLouie (talk) 02:54, 29 July 2019 (UTC)