Talk:Potential cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Potential cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact has been listed as one of the Natural sciences good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Archives: 1, 2, 3
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copyedited by Stfg, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 12 July 2012. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.


This provides a large number of future potential citations for this article: [1]

See also[edit]

I've removed the see also link to Cargo cult that someone added. This link refers primarily to the cargo cult science of Ancient Astronauts which has nothing to do with this topic. This has been previously explained to other editors in archived discussions. Please don't make me explain it again. This subject is a thought experiment that is frequently discussed by planetary scientists, astrobiologists and, philosophers. It does not assume that any contact has taken place in the past nor does it assume that contact will ever take place in the future. Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Viriditas. We need a way to stress that the only assumption made (and one that is verified historically) is that contact with an alien species will have an effect on our society. Wer900talkcoordinationconsensus defined 17:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)
We have historical evidence of the result of culture shock, which we ignore at our peril. Kortoso (talk) 00:44, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, it looks like I was wrong to remove this. It should be discussed in the article. Viriditas (talk) 01:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

RfC on title[edit]

A previous discussion on the featured-article status of this article resulted in a refusal of this status primarily because of a dispute regarding whether or not the title made assumptions whether or not extraterrestrial contact had occurred, or whether the reference to cultural impact implied that the article should only discuss arts, literature, and society, as opposed to science and technology. Please discuss here what would be a better title in light of the linked discussion. Wer900talk 19:38, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion has become very unruly and has gone off on many unnecessary tangents. Let me summarize the main points of the discussion:

  • NickCT continues to argue in favor of deletion, despite the quote from WP:CRYSTALBALL that justifies this article's existence. The quote states that " As an exception, even highly speculative articles about events that may or may not occur far in the future might be appropriate, where coverage in reliable sources is sufficient." I think that this is sufficient grounds for the inclusion of the article. Nick argues that because this article would never find a place in Britannica that it should not be here, but the truth is that being a topic of serious academic study and popular coverage for years, given its importance for humanity, and knowing that this is part of the interdisciplinary work performed in order to formulate post-detection protocols, it is a valid topic for the encyclopedia.
  • There appears to be a strong consensus of editors for emphasizing the potentiality of contact in the title in the belief that the current title could be interpreted as projecting a completely authoritative image of the article (which would be inaccurate), or perpetuating the view that contact has already happened and that the resultant cultural impact has happened as well (or is happening, or will happen in the immediate future). On another front, there is a dispute as to whether "cultural" covers the whole scope of the article. To resolve the disputes, I suggest the titles of Cultural impact of future extraterrestrial contact, Cultural impact of future extraterrestrial contact, or Potential impact of future extraterrestrial contact. Please discuss these, and if you can find a better title, don't be afraid to suggest one! Wer900talk 18:09, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
    Comment I find it hard to take this RFC seriously. Since I must, I regard "future" as equally tendentious. You might consider something like "possible" instead. However, IMO the whole thing is already too cumbersome. Aim to shorten the title rather than lengthen it. Who is likely to search for such a title anyway? Make it short and clarify the whole thing in the first sentence of the lede or hatnote. JonRichfield (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
    Jon, that's exactly what I want to do. I started this RfC as the primary writer of the article, in response to the tendentiousness displayed by Tony1 in the second FAC for this article, which was of excellent quality with the exception of (in his opinion) the assumptions made by the title. No such assumptions are made, and for those who think so the lede and hatnote already destroy these assumptions from the outset. Ideally, the current title would stay, as it is a phrase that is actually found in the literature and captures the scope of the article well without being overlong, as opposed to some proposed titles which are too long and unsearchable, as you said. Wer900talk 21:12, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Clearly a case of great minds in congruence! You may accordingly take my response as support. Cheers, JonRichfield (talk) 07:51, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
  • For clarity, I support both the existence of the article itself and the title, with or without the word "future" added. Jusdafax 00:32, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

The Dangers of First Contact[edit]

David Brin's, "The Dangers of First Contact" (2009) has several points that can be added to existing sections.[2] Viriditas (talk) 01:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Malware Link Removal[edit]

--Gary Dee 18:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

All links you removed are now being restored across the project. Please be more careful with which links you remove in the future.--Anderson I'm Willing To Help 01:42, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


I think he's the most famous of the cautious types: [3]

Many scientists, including Stephen Hawking, believe that contact with intelligent aliens would end badly for us—we'd be the Native Americans to the alien Europeans. "I imagine they might exist in massive ships," Hawking said recently, "having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonize whatever planets they can reach."

Kortoso (talk) 01:56, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

"However, as the nature of extraterrestrial civilizations is unknown"[edit]

This should really say "However, as the nature (OR EVEN EXISTENCE OF) of extraterrestrial civilizations is unknown", shouldn't it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultan42 (talkcontribs) 23:49, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

It says exactly that in the last sentence of the last paragraph of the lead section. Please read it. Viriditas (talk) 02:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)