Talk:Shadow person

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Shadow people)
Jump to: navigation, search

Not much information here...[edit]

The lack of information on this page makes it so useless. There's like two paragraphs on obvious reference, and that's it. Delete this page since it's just taking up space, and have no real informative value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 02:19, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

What exactly were you expecting to find here? Fraggle81 (talk) 02:53, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

I was expecting more history, myths and legends (lore), scientific explanations, and relations to other paranormal phenomenon. Information like what they supposedly look like, and where they popped into existence as a culture. Can't write without inspiration or information, might as well exist as a sub-topic of the Ghost page, despite not being all that similar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

It's difficult to find reliable sources. Shadow people aren't really as notable as Men in black, Grey aliens, and Little green men. I'll try to dig up more sources, but I'm not sure that I'll have any better luck than last time. Anyone have any suggestions? NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:55, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I see what you guys are talking about but as much experience as I have had in my life, it's really one of those things that you have to talk to others in person to learn more about. Anything that is metaphysical is going to be rather, impossible to verify at this point in time. I can vouch that Shadow People are darker than darkness, and that white shadow people are of an indistinguishable color (to me) but it doesn't mean I can be of a legitimate source, in fact there's no person that can be guaranteed as a legitimate source for this topic. The only thing this topic can cover (I think?) is the history and the variations of Shadow people that people may have encountered but even then I think it's not something that wikipedia really should be talking about due to facts being rather, impossible to present. Does that make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Not really. Wikipedia isn't trying to catch a shadow person in a jar and prove that it exists, it's just reporting on what existing sources have had to say about shadow people over the years. Which perhaps isn't much at the moment. Compare this to another article like Bigfoot, which has plenty of sources even though there's nothing concrete to say beyond "people tell stories, here's why they might tell them". --McGeddon (talk) 12:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

See shadows on the edge of vision if take too much SSDI Rx. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Old/Dead References?[edit]

The link for reference number six in this article seems to be broken or unavailable. Can anyone else corroborate this? – Quixotic Cleaner (talk) 00:12, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Yep, I get "Page cannot be crawled or displayed due to robots.txt.". Though, looking at the website's "About us" page, I'm not really sure that it meets Wikipedia's qualifications for a reliable source. It looks like a paranormal blog with no fact checking or editorial oversight. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 00:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Needs more information from global perspective[edit]

Hi, I will briefly discuss the lack of depth in the article that is very much a global phenomenon. some suggested the deletion of this article with a rather immature argument, I believe this is an important article and it should be augmented with information from a global perspective. currently it this article makes you feel that shadow people happened in 2003 through a show and interactive media. it is a fact that stories and folklore of such shadow people have been available through centuries and across the world and these are not part of the western world alone.

I have seen National geographic and discovery TV programs on such topics. so i think much research is needed to be dug up and included to do justice to the subject. (talk) 07:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Shadow Person Sighting Physiological Explanation[edit]

Please help - I'm trying to add (merge) the following article into the Shadow Person page. However, some of the images don't display the captions underneath the image, but instead display the image titles. Can anyone help me merge this article into the page with the correct captions? Annerpino (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I quickly looked over the relevant sources (by the way, you can't cite contributions to one Wikipedia article by using another Wikipedia article) and none of them mention the topic of shadow persons or make an explicit connection between shadow people and the pineal gland. So I'm afraid your proposed text is WP:OR and WP:SYNTH, which is prohibited by WP editorial policies. - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:57, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. It's interesting content, but I'm not sure we can fit it into this article without some work. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:59, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
And since I see that a new article draft reviewer advised you to add the content to this existing article, I will mention that Wikipedia works on WP:CONSENSUS which places editorial decision-making with any number of editors who may express legitimate concerns about the suitability of material. Long story short, even though one editor said it was OK, your contribution is still subject to review by other editors. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

I will gladly make any further adjustments necessary to merge this explanation within this page - especially in getting the correct captions to show under each image. Another page exists on Wikipedia: 'Apparitional Experience,' but the explanation is far more relevant here, since the apparition experienced under the conditions described is dark, shadowy, and human shaped - hence a shadow person. I am not citing another source's connection between the pineal gland and shadow person sightings per se, but offer an analytical synthesis of conditions already broadly accepted and understood - i.e. the pineal gland's photoreceptive function and dreaming processes, which combine into a phenomenon otherwise feared and promoted as a paranormal entity. If the following sentence (currently included in the Explanations for Shadow Person sightings):"These hallucinations have been directly compared to the paranormal entities described in folklore." is an acceptable explanation, one may wonder what is meant by 'explanation.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annerpino (talkcontribs) 19:22, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

It's precisely the "analytical synthesis of conditions already broadly accepted and understood" that is the problem. WP:SYNTHESIS specifically prohibits Fact A (sourced) + Fact B (sourced) + Fact C (sourced) = Novel conclusion D (unsourced). As a helpful caption at WP:OR puts it: "Outside of Wikipedia, original research is a key part of scholarly work. However, Wikipedia editors must not base their contributions on their own original research. Wikipedia editors must base their contributions on reliable, published sources". Many newcomers at Wikipedia make this mistake and become discouraged when they see their analysis is disallowed. I hope you won't. Best regards. - LuckyLouie (talk) 19:33, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

One 'explanation' already on the page begins: "One interviewed subject said that...etc." Another 'explanation' says: "These hallucinations have been directly compared to the paranormal entities described in folklore." Perhaps the mystery must be promoted to prevent this page's deletion. Dear NinjaRobotPirate, or anyone else, can you guide me on how to, in the absence of a lab and sleep subjects, revise this article for inclusion among these questionable offerings? Annerpino (talk) 20:08, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

To have your efforts included, you'd need to find a published source that meets WP:RS policy that specifically states the theory/proposition/conclusion that pineal photoreceptors retain the image of the pineal gland’s point of view which is a unique form created from light and dark light patches, as well as retaining an image formed by the human supraorbital ridge, which morphs into a shadowy bust to create a shadow person hallucination. The basic premise of the encyclopedia (I'm simplifying it greatly) is that editors take information on a topic from high quality reliable published sources and create article content using that same information and write it in their own words to avoid copyright issues and plagiarism. Can you understand how this is different from your original insights based on your own analysis of published sources? - LuckyLouie (talk) 20:34, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
The material is a WP:COPYVIO from Please see the encyclopedia's copyright policies. If you own the copyright, please see WP:DCP and especially Donating copyrighted material. LuckyLouie (talk) 14:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)