Talk:Institute of Noetic Sciences

message: These sources all say Edgar Mitchell was the founder, not the co-founder:
* Time Magazine 
* BusinessWeek 
* ABC News 
* NY Times 
*-- — Keithbob • Talk •  23:59, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Co-founder?

message: Those editors interested in upgrading the article with secondary sources so that the tag can be removed may find these books to be good resources:      -- — Keithbob • Talk •  00:28, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You need independent sources so those would be fairly crummy to use, IRWolfie- (talk) 09:38, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Primary sources tag

message: Quackwatch is an award winning website and is perfectly reliable for its own list, IRWolfie- (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Possibly. Can you elucidate? But first look at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=wp%3Aquackwatch&title=Special%3ASearch. Thanks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:44, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: if you question quackwatch itself, there are many reliably published sources that cover quackwatch's assessment of IONS .   -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 12:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Good starting points for an addition to this article. I am interested, too, in the idea that QW "is perfectly reliable for its own list." Is there a WP:Policy that applies? GeorgeLouis (talk) 13:17, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: A source is reliable for the existence and integrity of its own list. We aren't commenting on the quality of the list, merely noting that quackwatch lists it. Also note that WP:RSN has consistently found that Quackwatch is fine to use but sometimes it's tone is an issue (rather than content itself). On the list of the archive, I'd suggest having a look at some of the RSN threads. IRWolfie- (talk) 21:30, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, Quackwatch would be a reliable source for what appears in Quackwatch, but the two follow up questions are: 1)  are Quackwatch's opinions /analysis generally considered reliable? and 2) is Quackwatch's opinion about the subject an opinion of note that should be included? Given that other reliable sources have covered Quackwatch's opinion, I would say the answer to 2) is: yes. And apparently the RS notice board has generally stated that the answer to 1) is also yes.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:37, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:Otherstuffexists may or may not apply, but somebody could try adding something about the Quackwatch listing and see if it sticks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:21, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quackwatch again

message: It said Wernher von Braun was one of the founders, with reference ref name="Xiong2009". I see no mention of WvB in that reference, so I have removed von Braun. It is plausible he might have been part of the founding, so I hope someone will provide a good reference. GangofOne (talk) 21:59, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wernher von Braun 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Institute of Noetic Sciences. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131012050457/http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2013/9/17/space_explorer_touches_down_this_weekend.htm to http://www.hispanicbusiness.com/2013/9/17/space_explorer_touches_down_this_weekend.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Institute of Noetic Sciences. 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/20090605210243/http://www.biogenesis.com/corporate_information.html to http://www.biogenesis.com/corporate_information.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061203013528/http://www.noetic.org/about/history.cfm to http://www.noetic.org/about/history.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070513104943/http://www.noetic.org/research/programs.cfm to http://www.noetic.org/research/programs.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061130073352/http://www.noetic.org/about.cfm to http://www.noetic.org/about.cfm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127145826/http://noetic.org/library/publication-newsletters/ to http://noetic.org/library/publication-newsletters/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127145941/http://noetic.org/library/publication-magazines/ to http://www.noetic.org/library/publication-magazines/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:37, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified