Talk:Etzel Cardeña

Latest comment: 6 months ago by LuckyLouie in topic WP:FRINGE

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Etzel Cardeña. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

POV edit

The claim in this article is that ESP is being proven using science. Really? News to me. RobP (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit notes edit

Improved the article somewhat by removing uncited and 'not noteable' material, still needs more and better citations. The discussion to delete is still very relevant IMO. Without proving the existence of and hopefully citing RS (that aren't just broken links) it is difficult for me to justify keeping this article on the grounds of notability. Endercase (talk) 16:08, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Due to the reversion of my edit without discussion on the talk page I have weighed in at the deletion !vote about the article. Endercase (talk)
I don't think you can have tried very hard to cite any of this material before just removing it. I have added citations for most of it. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:24, 9 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

WP:FRINGE edit

The article gives weight to Cardeña's fringe "expressed views" but omits any mainstream reception, analysis, or context. As a WP:FRINGEBLP, we could apply sources such as Arthur S. Reber and James E. Alcock as well as Steven Novella per WP:PARITY. - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:33, 16 November 2023 (UTC)Reply