Talk:Jeremy Corbell

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Jeremy Kenyon Lockyer Corbell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110114080815/http://www.usadojo.com/biographies/jeremy-corbell.htm to http://www.usadojo.com/biographies/jeremy-corbell.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.iamrogue.com/news/movie-news/item/4916-check-out-trippy-images-from-the-bunraku-art-event.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

can we mention in this article that he was involved in the "reuse" without modification of a 2007 vision unlimited . DE f4.mpg student film as the 2004 Nimitz TIC TAC video http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.vision-unlimited.de/extern/* — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waptek (talk • contribs) 00:09, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

100 of 35 pounds

I undid this edit which added "Eventually he put 100 of the 35 lbs back on". If the user who made that edit (User:2605:E000:121B:4B50:CF2:5B24:4FF9:F384) returns, please clarify what you meant by "100 of the 35 lbs" (which is not mathematically possible), and if you have a source for this claim, please include it, either directly in the article or here on the talk page so someone else can do it for you. Thanks. -kotra (talk) 09:49, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

This might fall under quantum mathematics. Perhaps the noted user can cite the relevant paper on squeezing 10lbs of [REDACTED] out of a 3.5lb bag? AnomalousPhenomenologist (talk) 10:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)

Claims related to Titanic victim

In this 2014 tweet thread Corbell says his Great Great Uncle was Titanic victim Edward Thomas Lockyer. That explains the Lockyer in his full name. I can't find any reliable source at this time to cite, so I'm just noting this claim here in case any editor spots one someday. 5Q5|^✉ 14:05, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

COI and tone

Much of the promotional edits have been made by an IP, who appears to have first-hand knowledge of the subject and therefore likely either the subject himself or someone connected to him. Mansheimer (talk) 11:21, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Mr. Corbell leaves a lot to be desired as a source. I wouldn't describe him as a UFOlogist, having met and listened to him. He is definitely in love with his own voice, and manages to butt into other conversations to take credit for whatever is under discussion. Caveat emptor. Tonybaldacci (talk) 06:28, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Copy that. Einheit947 (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

UAP

Have you ever talked to President Carter bout them ,something u should check into 2601:248:8300:B3D0:E4B9:FE01:323A:F33B (talk) 17:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

The President Carter UFO sighting was covered (and explained) to Carter’s satisfaction) in the film, available on YouTube, “The UFO movie they don’t want you to see.” Enjoy. Rp2006 (talk) 22:00, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Corbell’s Education

He claims a self directed degree in Quantum studies. However, no such degree exists at the university he supposedly attended. In fact, the only refrence for his degree in “Quantum studies” is his own website.

I suspect he does not possess a university degree. Wikipedia should not allow his Wikipedia page to claim that he does possess a degree based on his own website. To me, that seems epistemologically incestuous. Furthermore, it would allow anyone to make any sort of claim within Wikipedia citing their own website. Obviously, that is majorally problematic. 2605:8D80:440:2A35:409A:C60F:BDBD:6B0C (talk) 02:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I had to do a little digging on this one. It looks like the University of California system does offer individual majors, and that includes UC Santa Cruz, where he claims to have gone. So I guess it's at least within the realm of possibility that he did an individual major that either he or the school just decided to call "Quantum Studies."

[1]https://senate.ucsc.edu/committees/cep-committee-on-educational-policy/policies-guidelines/indmajguidelines20181.pdf

I couldn't find a non-PDF related specifically to UCSC, but here is a blurb from UC Davis:

[2]https://www.ucdavis.edu/individual-majors

This raises a more general interesting question for me since I'm pretty new to editing on WP. Do you know the general WP guideline for verifying education? I couldn't find it and I figured WP had something. I'm still learning to navigate the site, so I probably just overlooked it. If we could find that, it would make it easier to judge situations like this. Neiby (talk) 02:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

When you go to a university in North America, you can do a self guided study, it’s called a Bachelor of General Studies. You don’t just get to name it yourself. Nevertheless, the problem here is Corbell is citing his education based on his own website. That would seem to be highly problematic. That is, anyone could create their own website with whatever made up accomplishments and create a credible wikipedia entry based on that webpage. 2605:8D80:440:2A35:413A:7B78:312C:ACCE (talk) 03:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I decided to search using DuckDuckGo instead of Google and I did find one source, such as it is, that he did graduate UCSC after studying there off and on for nine years:

[3]https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/aliens-real-ufo-area-51-nevada-pentagon-history-1046067/

That's the only reference I could find, such as it is. Of course there's no way to know how the reporter verified it. Neiby (talk) 03:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Corbell’s Education 2.0

The reference for Corbell’s education has changed. Previously, it was his own website; now it is a Rolling Stone article. However, I could not find any reference in this article to his edication. Therefore, this article should be removed as a reference.

Further questions: why does this wikipedia entry keep having weak references for Corbell’s education? Why use the veneer of a poor or a very poor reference to try to convince others of a university degree? 2605:8D80:440:2A35:F187:12AC:CA3E:E588 (talk) 19:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I added that reference. It is admittedly weak, but better than the previous reference. This is the only real reference I could find when I searched for it after reading the earlier comment about it. The relevant quote from the article:

"Did he go to UC-Santa Cruz on the nine-year plan and become an MMA guru? Yes."

That's it. I couldn't find any other reference. From a more general perspective, what is the usual criteria for a referencing for someone's education? It seems that in many--or even most--cases there isn't going to be an adequate source for it. Is Wikipedia's stance that education should not be mentioned at all unless it is sourced from a well-known quality source? If that's the case, what sources are adequate? Neiby (talk) 19:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I guess, the original reference to his education was “self promotion”. There is now a warning on the page about that.

My point is close to your point: Wikipedia does not validate education as real or not, so why feel the need to validate it with suspect citation, such as your own website? Nevertheless, the warning of “self-promotion” does help the reader. 2605:8D80:440:2A35:F187:12AC:CA3E:E588 (talk) 19:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit: “Promotional”, not “self-promotion” (although they may be equivalent). 2605:8D80:440:2A35:78DC:B22:8763:D4EC (talk) 22:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Flares and Balloons

I see that under Corbell’s Ufology section it has been written that an object he claims is a UFO is actually Bokeh effect. I wonder if an editor would like to add two further [in]famous videos put forward by Corbell that he purports are UFO’s but video analysis revealled that one is flares and the other, The Jellyfish UFO, is likely helium balloons? I believe such an addition would give the casual reader a more rounded understanding of Corbell vis-a-vis the UFO topic. 2605:8D80:442:B7A1:9D67:5719:EDF:1C49 (talk) 10:08, 13 March 2024 (UTC)