Talk:Younger Dryas impact hypothesis

message: Found Sept 2013 National geographic article by Robert Kunzig, Did a Comet Really Kill the Mammoths 12,900 Years Ago?
Some interesting quotes. from renowned climate scientist Wallace Smith Broecker that could be useful in this article:
"Most people were trying to disprove this," said Wallace Broecker, a geochemist and climate scientist at Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory. "Now they're going to have to realize there's some truth to it"
""The idea is that the system is drifting toward instability, but can't quite make it," Broecker said. "Then an impact comes along and it's like a knockout punch."
Researchers are only beginning, Broecker added, "to figure out what an impact did or didn't do. It's going to take a lot of people a lot of time."
My usual questions: in the context of YDIH is National Geographic a reliable source? Is Robert Kunzig a reliable source? Is this article considered a third-party, independent source as defined in  Wikipedia:Fringe theories Independent sources guideline. Dmcdysan (talk) 18:51, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  2013 National Geographic Article - Quotes from Walter Broecker 

message: William C. Mahaney is not mentioned in the article as of 7 Mar 2024. I believe (at least) the following citations are relevant.
Sept 2022 Mahaney et al , Late Pleistocene Glacial-Paleosol-cosmic record of the Viso Massif—France and Italy: New evidence in support of the Younger Dryas boundary (12.8 ka) 
January 2023 Mahaney The Younger Dryas Boundary (YDB): terrestrial, cosmic, or both? 
Search on [Holliday 2023] shows Mahaney mentioned 33 times, mostly in conjunction with black mats interpretation. 
A highly cited source in Geology, Geomorphology and Paleoclimatology according to Research Gate, William C. Mahaney. I believe the publisher of the above are also reliable sources. I believe that Mahaney is a good secondary source. Any disagreement?
Mahaney may not qualify as a third party since he was a co-author in a 2018 paper with over 30 other authors (Wikipedia automatic citation supports a maximum of 15), some identified elsewhere in this article as YDIH proponents: Extraordinary Biomass-Burning Episode and Impact Winter Triggered by the Younger Dryas Cosmic Impact ∼12,800 Years Ago. 2. Lake, Marine, and Terrestrial Sediments
Adding a link to the 2007 Rex Dalton Blast in the past? Nature article could help address the banner comment "This article may be too technical for most readers to understand." The photographs and description there helped me and could help readers better visualize what a "black mat" is.
Does anyone object to addition of a brief summary at the end of the "Black mats" section, where all of the citations are older except for the simulation by Jorgensen in 2020, which has been called into question since it is only a simulation and not a field measurement. Not clear if all the references given in the 7 Mar 2024 version of that section are relevant, many appear to be a primary source, and unclear if the summaries are verifiable. Suggest replacement with "black mats" section opponents view with a summary of secondary source [Hollliday 2023]   Could help address issue of usage of too many primary sources. Suggest there be a banner added at beginning of the article stating this. I'll look into how to do this unless someone objects.
Comments? Dmcdysan (talk) 01:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional reliable sources - Mahaney YDIH paper summaries, citations 

message: Attributing topic title to this great work ,
in order to attend to personal matters I will be only intermittently active on Wikipedia, if at all, for several months.  ....pause .... waiting for cheering and applause to subside .....
Seriously though, I intended to help, but realize sometimes such statements are not well received.  (Click past the donation request to see content).
I tried to make an number of suggestions that I viewed as constructive to improve this article and asked if anyone one was interested - I did not interpret lack of response  as WP:SILENCE and tried to ask questions in the sense "that if you disagree, the onus is on you to say so." However, before expending more effort, if you are interested in me expanding on my proposals to improve this article please let me know by a positive response over the next several months. The good news is that I have already posted many of my ideas as topics on this talk page; the bad news is that I have more ideas only in a draft state.
I have been desperately seeking reliable third-party sources (e.g., college textbooks) on this subject and will purchase them for my own education. I think citing such sources would help address the too many primary sources issue that this article has. So far, I purchased the 2021 text Vanished Giants which supports the YDIH opponent view for Late Pleistocene extinctions. I plan to cite this reference there and that may help with the large number of primary sources used there. I am still searching for other such college level textbooks and if anyone has recommendations, I would greatly appreciate that.
The following may be disturbing to some, and although not directly relevant here, before reacting I suggest recalling and/or (re) reading WP:CIVIL - I have found this to be a helpful coping method for past stressful situations on Wikipedia. Others are reading this Wikipedia article and criticizing it, for example the 22 Oct 2022 Wikipedia's bias - a case study: The Younger Dryas impact hypothesis and the related discussion starting 25 Oct 2022 at Wikipedia FTN Talk thread M Sweatman publishing a blog attacking Wikipedia and two editors. Looking over that critique and the current state of the article, not much has changed for the better. Personally, I consider some of Sweatman's statements rude according to WP:CIVIL (e.g., the comments on the Evidence and History sections) but in IMHO (IETF parlance), the critique does make some valid points that editors of this article should consider. I found this only recently after going over hundreds of pages of archives. I had already independently made some recommendations along these lines previously.
The above FTN thread  clarified to me in how some ways the article has come to its current state that may actually worse than that critiqued above by deleting a number of sentences and text that stated the YDIH proponent (which at my current level of understanding is equivalent to CRG member (however that is defined)). In a number of cases, the deleted statements had little content and may have been written by an editor sympathetic to YDIH opponents and the deletion was justified. However, the result is now that many sections/ paragraphs (e.g., the summary) begin with the YDIH opponent view while the YDIH proponent view is never described. IMHO, this is a major reason why I believe the article has an even less WP:NPOV than it did on 22 Oct 2022. Through cooperative editing, I believe this could be resolved. I have little experience with WP:BRD, and see that it has been used extensively in Talk:YDIH. I found that WP:BRD does describe many optional strategies and I suggest that interested editors consider those as well. I made such a proposal in .
IMHO, there was some good discussion about reorganizing the article to list the proponent view (without undue weight) and follow it with the opponent view but no consensus that I saw. There was also some discussion about starting over on the article and rewriting it from scratch and I did see some interest for other editors in this approach. Some secondary sources have also become available and rewriting using only those could help condense and improve the article. For my own usage, I have started to do this in my sandbox, but it  is not ready for review. If and when I have something worthy of your review, I will post a draft on this talk page. I can't find an official Wikipedia guideline for this, but please don't mess around in my sandbox. If you do, you will find a bunch of stuff there unrelated to this topic, but I believe that I have avoided Wikipedia:BADSAND (cool acronym) and have followed guidelines in Wikipedia:User pages so I have nothing to hide. By stating this I realize that I have opened myself up to an investigation, and if I have done something inappropriate please message me with @ so that I can attempt to resolve it and learn. Doing Wikipedia work on an iPad is limited, so I will not be able to provide a detailed response but would appreciate the opportunity to attempt a response and learn.
Mahalo Dmcdysan (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aloha, and Thanks for All the Fish!