Talk:Antônio Vilas-Boas

message: Amazingly enough, the article didn't fix itself after about six months or so, so I went ahead and injected some NPOV by simply removing or toning down some of the more outrageous claims, working with the phrasing and throwing a couple of instances of  in there. I still wish someone who was actually familiar with the subject could work on this one... -- Captain Disdain 02:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The people most likely to be "familiar with the subject" are also most likely to be crackpots, and their sources are likely to be disreputable. Not to put too fine a point on it, the "incident" isn't merely implausible, not merely "outlandish". No, as related by the protagonist, it's patently absurd. If visits to earth from extra-terrestrial aliens occur, I can say with impunity that they don't occur like this. TheScotch (talk) 03:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Made some changes

message: Villas Boas is ONE name with two words; so he should not be called "Boas", but Villas Boas.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcelorvb (talk • contribs) 12:11, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. "Villas Boas" (variants: Vilas-Boas, Villas-Boas, Vilas-Bôas, Villasboas etc.) is one of several compound surnames in the Portuguese language. Like Castelo Branco (also Castelbranco, Castelo-Branco), Santa Rita (also Santarrita) and others. By the way, the surname means "Good Villages" and evokes a region in Portugal that was taken from Spain during one of the earliest mediaeval struggles for Portuguese independence (that is, this is a surname with a noble origin!). 189.13.13.10 (talk) 01:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  He should not be called "Boas" 

message: Isn't it "Boas's story" since Boas is his name? You don't exclude the "s" in names.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.174.235.245 (talk) 22:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Grammar 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Antônio Vilas Boas. 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/20060427053131/http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk:80/arc/90/revis01.html to http://www.magonia.demon.co.uk/arc/90/revis01.html
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 01:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: .ما تالله ,إِلَى هُنَا
Heigh, ye dear Wikipedians!
The researcher ta'en mention at the end of English's Wikipedia article, claimed that Boas' abduction allegation was inspired by an article published by Brazilian newspaper O Cruzeiro, regarding Adamski's famed abduction case, quite briefly. However, one should remark, the newspaper's article was released in November, 1957, as displayed by French Wikipedia article in a footnote about (indeed, one really ought to be screwed up, being poor victim, from such $keptic's Sagetrieb!), and Boas' documented abduction had befallen in October, 1957. (Thou behold'st; O Cruzeiro's article was released one month later!)
Wherefore, his conclusions, as we have ascertained, are unreliable and woebegonely wrong!
In the Portuguese version of this issue, it is also ta'en into account a reported Serbian CIA agent who informed an investigator (as 'a eyely alleged), about the Operation Mirage, plotted by the intelligence agency, on Brazil's ground, to hallucinate lede (and by and large rabble, why not?) envisanging faux abductions' allegations thereafter. First of all, in order to pinpoint and make sure of the accuracy thereof, we must have, by any sort of investigative demand, another sources to corroborate and be in line with such allegation, including other people who partaked of such off-the-wall covert operation and also victimed of. Is there one? Secondly, are there some CIA documents, journalistic and scholarly intelligence's news and report(s), other books about CIA (and eke related to), addressing on this set of events, affirming uncontroversially such stuff? As far as the author tells us, pretty etically (and 'a contrives as well), there is no other source, acessory background, whistleblowing or any investigation holding these claims up. Regarding as a whole, these assertions are also totally flawed and cannot be believed whatsoe'er.
Notwithstanding, as everything hitherto remaining controversial (pardon des paroles, c'est mon avis, съеби́сь вы разоблачения!, promoters of "clear-cut" explanations; id est, sophistry!), I shall attend to, while I have recked the situation stoop and roop, further discussions on this same subject.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by IAMTHESAVIOROFMANKIND (talk • contribs) 02:36, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: So here we have, apparently, input from an actual extraterrestrial alien on the matter. TheScotch (talk) 00:50, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article needs to be re-evaluated as early as possible. Here's why 

message: 1. The science of astronomy tells us that interstellar distances are vast, and the science of physics tells us that the speed of light is an absolute limiting factor (various tenuous and highly speculative and otherwise problemetical work-arounds have been proposed, but I'm referring to the state of current determined knowledge). This necessarily makes regular visits to earth from advanced exterrestrial species highly unlikely.
2. The science of evolutionary biology tells us that the chance of exterrestrial species completely independently developing closely humanoid characteristics, so closely that the protagonist in the story finds himself intensely sexually attracted to a female specimen, is vanishingly small.
3. The science of biology tells us that the chance of humans being able to interbreed with an independent autonomous extraterrestrial species is so small as to be essentially non-existent.
Is it POV then for editors to approach the story detailed in this article as if it were a work of fantasy fiction? (I qualify "fiction" with "fantasy" because non-fantasy fiction describes events that didn't happen but conceivably could happen). We have to draw a line somewhere, don't we? TheScotch (talk) 02:08, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Belaboring the obvious