Talk:Budd Hopkins

message: See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags  Nhl4hamilton | Chit-Chat  04:02, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Page has been updated, reference format corrected--SojoQ (talk) 10:59, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Citations & references

message: Budd Hopkins' death was announced by fill-in host George Knapp on the nationally syndicated radio program, Coast to Coast AM, at about 2215 PDT on 21 August 2011.  Hopkins had been suffering from cancer and had been in hospice care for three weeks prior to his passing, according to Knapp.  Further details will no doubt emerge as the regular press catches up. — QuicksilverT @ 05:20, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Death announcement 

message: Looking over this page and I'm not seeing the citations to prove what has been claimed. I think someone (possibly me) needs to sit down and look this entire page over and check each of these citations. My first thought is that this page has been written by a fan or someone very close to the subject. For example this sentence "By the late 1980s, Hopkins was one of the most prominent people in ufology, earning a level of mainstream attention that was nearly unprecedented for the field." Really the most prominent?  According to whom? This whole area "Alien abduction" has only one citation.  If anyone can supply these citations please do so.  Otherwise the claims will be removed. Sgerbic (talk) 01:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: I'm going to be working on improving this page and adding citations. If anyone has anything to add or independent articles to reference, please comment here. Andreac (talk) 22:53, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Andreac I look forward to seeing what you come up with.  This page is in sorry shape IMO and needs a neutral editor to look it over.  I see someone has ignored your post here on the talk page and is making all kinds of edits to the page. They are going to be sad when they see you have overwritten his/her changes when you are finished.  I would contact them, but I see they do not have a user page. Sgerbic (talk) 23:51, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I noticed this page has been quiet for a while and still needs updating. I'm actively researching Budd's work and have many articles to reference that include UFO support and criticisms, plus information about his artwork. Andreac, are you still updating the page? SojoQ (talk) 20:20, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Working on page 

message: I've completed my research to date, added updates to the page (content as well as references) and removed tags indicating references needed.--SojoQ (talk) 11:02, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Completed Updates 

message: (15 January 2011). "The Priests of High Strangeness: co-creation of the alien abduction phenomenon". Paratopia 1 (1): 1–11. is a reliable source according to WP:SOURCE, which includes magazines. However, one cannot use it to write that the ideas expressed therein are "unsubstantiated" or "derogatory", unless the author herself has said that about her own claims (and she doesn't). These words and the phrase that she "went on to insinuate, without proof" are interpretations of the text that cannot be made with the text itself as source; they can only be leveled against Rainey's article externally by a different reliable source, and it must mention *who* thinks that Rainey's claims are "unsubstantiated" or "derogatory" or "without proof" (otherwise it violates WP:WEASEL). Therefore this text, inserted by 124.149.182.30 and restored by 202.159.147.48 after I had removed it, constitutes original research, which violates WP:NOR. Therefore I will remove this info again. Greetings, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:17, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Paratopia'' article 

message: Elizabeth Loftus' claims of identifying subtle cues were not corroborated by subsequent research. Her work constituted "original research". "Original research" is not allowed to be used on Wikipedia, whatever its source. I realise that Budd Hopkins' Wikipedia page is now being managed and puppeted by the Susan Gerbic's "Guerilla Skepticism on Wikipedia" movement but the rules at Wikipedia specifically state that any uncorroborated "Original Research" cannot be used as a source. Elizabeth Loftus' claims about identifying subtle cues that Hopkins was leading hypnotised subjects was not proven by her, nor was it corroborated by further research. As such it falls into the category of "Original Research" which isn't accepted by Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.159.166.64 (talk) 01:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Disagree. Loftus' published. It is not wp:OR. You are also adding a source from http://paratopia.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/paratopia-mag_vol1_1-15-11.pdf which is a self-published blog. Clearly not wp:RS. Jim1138 (talk) 02:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Agree, it was replaced by AnomieBOT. Jim1138 (talk) 04:30, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not the case that "original research" by ANYONE is banned on Wikipedia! It is unpublished OR by a Wikipedia editor that is forbidden! All research — all knowledge! — was "original research" for someone back in the day! (Knucklehead!) 216.164.62.52 (talk) 16:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Budd Hopkins

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: "Lack" does not mean there is no evidence, it means there is not enough of it, and its significance is not good enough. If I show you a pebble and claim it is evidence that I have been abducted by aliens, then voila! there is evidence. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:21, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lack of physical evidence