Talk:Santa Fe courthouse ghost

message: :Image:Unknown Object June 2007 Santa Fe NM.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 21:17, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Unknown Object June 2007 Santa Fe NM.jpg

message: Marked article for possible bias. The video may or may not be convincing to viewers; however, it is largely written with an assumption and tone that definitively sees one side as "realistic" and the other as "pseudoscientific". That, however, is a relatively very minor issue compared to presenting a study performed by Skeptical Inquirer as proving the case to be that of an insect crossing the camera. Even Wikipedia's own article on CSI (the organization responsible for SI) relates the criticism they've received for moving the goalposts and pseudoskepticism. If the only study into this incident has been performed and published under SI's/CSI's auspices, then unfortunately the issue will have to admitted as one that could have possibly been caused by an insect, but that further research has not been performed, so it cannot be stated as absolutely certain to be so.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Genevieve de la Voie Moyenne (talk • contribs) 00:34, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I mean, there is only science and pseudoscience, it's a two sided thing with nothing in-between. I have found a couple of areas where the article could possibly be written more neutrally and have made changes. OneUpOnUs (talk) 02:03, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Bias

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) 19:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

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) 08:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion