Talk:Mutual UFO Network

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Mutual UFO Network article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Paranormal Mid‑importance

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006 July 31. The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mutual UFO Network. 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/20121014022924/http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/local_story/Have-you-seen-a-UFO-Hoosier-in_1349999210/ to http://www.dailyjournal.net/view/local_story/Have-you-seen-a-UFO-Hoosier-in_1349999210/

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:28, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt To Discredit MUFON?[edit]

Why has there been given outsize space including news about members of MUFON having far-right views? Should we discuss how MUFON members have political viewpoints across the spectrum? Large organizations, for example, the US government have members with diverse viewpoints, but when I look at the US government page, I don't see any mention of viewpoints of its members. It only mentions politics to the extent of the nature of its civics. "Federal", "States", etc. Perhaps we should go to only that extent when describing MUFON as well. There was a mention earlier of one of its members being a pedophile, which has now been removed. There isn't a mention of pedophiles or molesters in the US government (Roy Moore ^[1], teen molester). There is not much present discussion of its work, or the cases that it has solved, of what its organizational structure is (in detail), etc. This is reminiscent of the "debunkery" and "ridicule" present on Wikipedia of UFOlogists in general, except this of course seems more targeted, and I would say this because in some articles about UFOs when I tried to insert what was considered news, I was redirected to put it under "responses" in another article (Pentagon UFO videos v Pentagon UFO Report). So, this piece of news seems unnecessary and counterproductive to maintaining NPOV on this article. I hope that we can work some way around this to improve the quality of this encyclopedia in general and this article in particular and not seemingly try to undermine people, institutions , ideas, etc, just because we don't like them.Chantern15 (talk) 21:05, 29 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

Please note that all the content in the "Officers and donors with far-right viewpoints" section, as well as the content regarding Jan Harzan's arrest, is supported by reliable, independent, verifiable secondary sources. There is no violation of WP:RS, WP:DUE or WP:NPOV here. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 01:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to agree with you, but in absence of much of the work which MUFON has carried out and half the article is criticism, I'd like to think that whoever wrote this article wanted it to seem as if MUFON was just some organization full of kooks and provocateurs.Chantern15 (talk) 09:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

WE go with what RS consider significant.Slatersteven (talk) 09:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On enWiki content is determined by what is reported by reliable, independent secondary sources. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 12:43, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Chantern15. I think you misunderstand WP:NPOV. NPOV doesn't require we avoid too much criticism from RS's because it makes an organization look bad. NPOV isn't "balancing" criticism from RS's by referencing an organization's web site for cases they say they solved or detailed descriptions of their organizational structure. WP:NOTNEUTRAL is a good essay that helps explain Wikipedia's definition of neutrality. - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So in the spirit of neutrality and proportionality, 3/4ths of the criticism of MUFON is on a few of its members having far-right views? Wouldn't it be a better service as an encyclopedia to flesh out the pseudoscience section, or its history section?223.236.202.200 (talk) 23:29, 30 September 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

It would be better service to the encyclopedia, Chantern15, to include content derived from reliable, independent secondary sources, whatever its topical focus. Such content is currently in the article. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 02:07, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't Wikipedia have some policies about news? Why is just this piece of news about MUFON mentioned and not any other?Chantern15 (talk) 02:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

You mean wp:notnews, and this does not mean we can't use news sources. Now if you have some RS that discuss MUFON present them.Slatersteven (talk) 09:08, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have anything at this current moment.Chantern15 (talk) 01:30, 2 October 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

^ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-pedophile/2017/11/19/1a9ae238-cb21-11e7-aa96-54417592cf72_story.html

I think the Newsweek source mentions some of the group’s activities aside from the scandal. - LuckyLouie (talk) 01:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have no info about that, I leave it to your discretion.Chantern15 (talk) 02:56, 2 October 2021 (UTC)chantern15[reply]

Animal mutulations[edit]

the animals are mainly cows The reason is that the cows organs are similar to a humans they use the organs to reproduce and fluids for feeding them selves 2001:8003:33E9:BE00:91FD:6892:150A:5AB6 (talk) 01:52, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That David MacDonald, Jan Harzan, et alia engage in cattle "mutulation" in order to reproduce and feed themselves is ... well, that's exciting, if not actually stunning, news to me. That information would certainly merit inclusion in this article, but only if it was supported by reliable, secondary sources. I eagerly await learning more about this. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 02:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ufo[edit]

I have pictures and video of ufo over vail around 2016. At that time there was a posted video and 1 other same sighting. All history of this has been wiped off all websites or Google searches. Why? How? Onecrazywingnut (talk) 13:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You would need to ask them, not us. We are not a wp:forum. Slatersteven (talk) 13:21, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ufo[edit]

Did anyone see a ufo in Cornwall last night? As I did 92.15.112.42 (talk) 17:11, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We are not a wp:forum. Slatersteven (talk) 17:13, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/roy-moore-is-not-a-pedophile/2017/11/19/1a9ae238-cb21-11e7-aa96-54417592cf72_story.html

[1]