Talk:Dinosaur Valley State Park

message: "The young earth creationist Carl Baugh claims to have found human and dinosaur footprints together there"
:...just how old is this Carl Baugh, anyway? (Wetman 2 July 2005 20:16 (UTC))
Is there an article that has information about these human/dino footprints and the surrounding controversy and research, as well as possible explanations?--Tiberius47 05:25, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I found it here searching on the terms Zana Douglas, dinosaur fossils, and the strings "good sculptor" and "just carved more." I do hope this will be acceptable as verifying the reference, unless we really do delete reliable journalistic sources once they move into a paid archive. Auntie E (talk) 15:24, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: As I asked in the discussion on the article Talk:Paluxy_River, I am confused as to why so much credence has been given to Zana Douglas' testimony when there is virtually no information that can be found about her on the internet.  There are LOTS of posts that contain her quote, but that does not make her a credible source.  Does she have an axe to grind?  Is she an evolutionist?  Does she feel that the folks that are currently "selling" something in her "hometown" are taking something that she rightfully deserves?  There are a few pages that turn up on a Google search that seem to discredit (or at least insinuate that he has an agenda) the author (Bud Kennedy) of the story as well.  Understandably, the author is a writer, and all writers have critics.  But this article seems to take the words of Zana at face value. --Codron (talk) 06:05, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Got references? What "few pages..." (reliable sources please)? Your use of the word evolutionist says quite a bit, just what is an evolutionist? Vsmith (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I will spend the time to find the "few pages" as soon as I am able.  However, that does not touch on the initial question.  My use of the word "evolutionist" is merely to point out that Zana may be trying to debunk the young-Earth creationists evidence against evolutionary theory without further proof.  Whether she is a theist or atheist is irrelevant to the question of reliability. --Codron (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What we appear to have (but unfortunately the link appears to be outdated) in this wiki article is an eyewitness statement taken from a properly cited mainstream news source.  Such a source should be presumed reliable unless another at least equally good source can be found that contradicts the first.  The journalist apparently (again, I don't have the article to consult) wrote that:  1) Zana Douglas is a relative of people who used to produce false footprints, and that 2) she made a certain statement about her father and grandfather from personal knowledge.  Unless someone can come up with a reliable citation that she is not who the article says she is, or that she did not make the quoted statement, then the paragraph should stand as is.  Of course, if someone can come up with a cited source that impeaches Zana Douglas as a reliable source on her own family, that should be added to the article to aid the reader in judging the facts. Plazak (talk) 20:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

text: I deleted the reference to the newspaper article on the page. Since this reference cannot be examined, anything it says is now hearsay. If anyone can find a reliable source for this statement . . . please add it back in.TDurden1937 (talk) 19:13, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You are free to access the article in their online archives.  There is no requirement that a newspaper/book/paper have a non-print version to become a reliable source.  If you need instructions on accessing the archives to validate, please let me know. Kuru (talk) 20:47, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Ft. Worth Telegram-Star reference