Talk:Wow! signal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Comet theory[edit]

@, I'm glad you agree that the comet theory should be mentioned. However, your last edit removed most of the debunking explanation, which defeats your own point about due weight (i.e. the original version was in fact giving more weight to the debunking, rather than to the theory). I see that we currently reference three sources from Paris, where one would probably be plenty, or none at all, as you suggest with regard to using secondary sources instead, but I wouldn't rush to delete or revert; plus, I'm quite busy now. --Deeday-UK (talk) 13:16, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Referring to your preferred version as the "last good version" is both arrogant and insulting.
  • This nonsensical "theory" does not need extensive debunking. It just needs to be identifed as nonsense. WP: DUE, WP:FRINGE
  • Primary sources do not need citing; there are secondary sources. WP:RS, WP:WPNOTRS
  • The person is not notable and does not need to be referred to by name.
Say that someone made a nonsensical claim, if absolutely necessary; cite a source. Say that it was nonsense; cite a source. Job done, no need for anything else. If you disagree, next time do so without insulting me. (talk) 16:27, 16 July 2019 (UTC)