Talk:Uri Geller

message: I swapped the third and fourth paragraphs in the litigation section to put the history of litigation in a more chronological order.
Colinj (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Swapped paragraphs three and four in litigation section 

message: 'Geller is well known for making predictions regarding sporting events. Skeptic James Randi and British tabloid newspaper The Sun have demonstrated the teams and players he chooses to win most often lose.'
This would constitute a paranormal power, albeit a negative one.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.164.181.33 (talk) 01:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eh? 

message: This was a fascinating documentary and made lots of interesting claims. The funny thing is that none of it is anywhere in the encyclopedia article although some of it is apparently quite well known and documented. 
Was or is Uri Geller a member of Mossad? - Did he do work for the CIA and other intelligence services?, did he take part in remote viewing experiments, was he part of Stargate? The real question is, does any part of the documentary stand up? 
I must admit that I have some knowledge of the psychic and far viewing. Some of what the program says seems very insightful and powerful, other things much less so. Some parts of Uri Gellar's descriptions of his 'powers' do not add up, some things are not mentioned but their censorship would make sense. Its always been very hard to tell whether Uri Geller was fake or real but the answer seems to be that it has to be a bit of both - and that really fits more than anything with being a 'spook'..
Ok this is only a warning that this documentary is out there, I'm sure there is other related evidence, or maybe it will be published in the near future. Without at least mentioning this aspect of Uri Gellar's life (real or not) the article is incomplete. Lucien86 (talk) 15:46, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I find it bizarre that the BBC web page describing the TV programme was considered an 'unreliable source' for the assertion in the article that "A 2013 BBC documentary claimed that the scientists who did research on Geller were funded by the CIA, for whom he worked secretly as a 'psychic spy'."  Is someone suggesting that the writeup on the BBC's web site does not correctly describe the content of the programme?  That would be most surprising.  Anyway, I added an independent source describing the programme's content, namely a review in the Telegraph, which backs up what the website says. --Brian Josephson (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  BBC Documentary, the Secret Life of Uri Geller 

message: Towards the end of the 2013 documentary, Geller stated "I am an entertainer, I am a showman, I am in showbusiness - but, there is that other side to Uri Geller, and I love that side as much as I love the totally showbusiness side of Uri Geller - and that side is the dark side; it's what you see in spy movies." Charlie Koczka, former U.S. Customs Agent stated that Geller worked for the Mexican Government in an undercover capacity. Roger Sawyer, Former U.S. Consular Official, stated Geller was a regular guest at the home of the President of Mexico, José López Portillo. None of this shows I "believe in" anything about Geller, merely that important people allowed themselves to be duped by him. I am finished with editing Uri Geller on Wikipedia Dickie birdie (talk) 18:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Geller's latest claims made on a TV show of being a psychic spy may have a mention in the article body but showcasing them in the article lead is seriously WP:UNDUE. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uri Geller article 

message: Skeptics like Paul Kurtz only did a HALF-ASS JOB on Geller, omitting the fact he made his wealth from mineral dowsing and not from bending spoons and forks. The only place in the world this info is missing is on Wikipedia. Just because the Skeptics did a HALF-ASS job on Geller does not mean the info has to be omitted from Wikipedia. Geller did not get his mansions and Rolls Royces from bending forks. Dickie birdie (talk) 05:39, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: And if anyone actually bothers to read Geller's biography by Puharich, it will be instantly seen that both Targ and Puthoff are goofballs who accepted the accounts of ET Communication between Geller and the Flying Saucers when the "evidence of the tape recordings" were presented to them by Puharich and Geller at the SRI. Dickie birdie (talk) 05:54, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  GELLER AND SKEPTICS 

message: For the first time, in 2014, Wikipedia editors are finding out that Geller stopped doing his spoon bending and fork bending tricks during the 1970s. And for the very first time also, Wikipedia Editors are finding out about Geller's mineral dowsing, something that has been reported by other people since at least the 1980s. But something that has been overlooked by skeptics, who continuously keep referring to Geller's spoon bending and fork bending tricks of the 1970s, frozen in a time-warp. Dickie birdie (talk) 11:56, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The Wikipedia Editors are unable to offer any response in the form of discussion. But continue to delete material containing bonafide references. Dickie birdie (talk) 12:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't see that the Financial Times source you added to the lede supports the claim that Geller "stopped doing his spoon bending and fork bending tricks in a regular and professional way during the 1970s", so I've cut this sentence. --McGeddon (talk) 13:03, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the "vague" tag that Dickie birdie added because the sentence isn't vague and is supported by the content and references in the main body of the article. As for  the edit summary stating that "needs evidence to support statement Geller has been bending forks and spoons after the 1970s" the sentence doesn't say this? Theroadislong (talk) 13:11, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Dickie birdie has requested  a citation required for "Geller bending spoons and forks "for decades" but the sentence doesn't say this? Theroadislong (talk) 16:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Tendentious requests of citations for things already established by multiple reliable sources is considered to be disruptive. Ditto for repeated attempts to insert claims of citizenship and social relationships related to Mexico, sourced to a TV show. - LuckyLouie (talk) 17:06, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  "Wikipedia editors are finding out that Geller stopped doing his spoon bending and fork bending tricks during the 1970s", this is false. Look on Wikipedia Commons for photographs or just any internet search engine there are photographs as recent as the late 2000s of Geller performing spoon bending or similar feats in public. Goblin Face (talk) 20:13, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  URI GELLER AND WIKIPEDIA EDITORS 

message: I've cleaned up the material referring to psychical researcher W. E. Cox  that was being misrepresented as scientific testing by ostensibly objective magician(s), but would prefer an independent reliable source to the Parapsychological Association paper reprinted by "www.zem.demon.co.uk". - LuckyLouie (talk) 16:28, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Edward William Cox was a parapsychologist who worked with J. B. Rhine at Duke University. He was a believer in psychokinesis - even publishing several fringe papers on it. His only link to magic was becoming an associate member for the Society of American Magicians. This does not mean anything, anyone can become an associate member. It is incorrect to refer to Cox as a magician (even though paranormal books like to do this). I think Cox should be removed from the article. He is a minor parapsychologist with a minority fringe view and the sourcing to a parapsychology paper is not good in my opinion. I have no complaint with this source   as it gives some background on Cox, but it does not mention Geller. So in short I would request to remove Cox from the article. If anyone declines let me know. Goblin Face (talk) 18:14, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  W. E. Cox 

message: Mentioning that the local paper is reporting the Geller has moved to Tel Aviv. Specscat (talk) 12:18, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it worth 

message: I'm not sure whether this phrase in the lead paragraph could be changed to "stage acts" to be more neutral and/or accurate. Thoughts? -- œ™ 07:30, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like User:License2ill changed it from "television shows and appearances" to "television appearances and hoax demonstrations" today. The entirety of their edits here seem general unhelpful and POV (that Geller didn't have a "career", he had "appearances"), beyond their first edit about Randi's lawyer and the bit about the gorilla statue. I've reverted those edits. --McGeddon (talk) 08:45, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah thank you. Silly me for not checking into the history first. -- œ™ 08:59, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hoax demonstrations" 

message: I see we note this case but as far as I can tell it was thrown out. A search today did not find any reliable independent sources discussing the outcome of the case, does anybody know of any? Guy (Help!) 23:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geller v. Nintendo 

message: "Throughout the years, Geller has used simple conjuring tricks to simulate the effects of psychokinesis and telepathy."  I have changed simple to skilful.  His tricks are not simple, they require great skill. His skill is highly admired by magicians. The award he has received for services to magic is highly prestigious, and rarely given. And James Randi, for all his boating, has never come close to reproducing them, he simply does not have the skill.
82.42.185.174 (talk) 23:04, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm taking out the adjective altogether. Not up to WPdians to decide on subjective issues regarding ability - WP:WORDS - puffery Edaham (talk) 01:48, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geller's magic 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Uri Geller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.zem.demon.co.uk/espsucc.htm
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.randi.org/hotline/1994/0048.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060526200049/http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_n6_v22/ai_21275515 to http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2843/is_n6_v22/ai_21275515
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:47, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Uri Geller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141028225327/http://www.springfilms.tv/productions/past-productions/uri-geller/ to http://www.springfilms.tv/productions/past-productions/uri-geller/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The article appears to be strongly bias toward the skeptical side as shown by selections and omissions of many relevant sources, e.g.  http://www.urigeller.com/scientific-paranormal/what-scientists-say-about-uri-geller/  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.80.1.77 (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sorry but "debunkingskeptics.com" isn't considered a reliable source, or more significantly, an independent one. As for your other question, Wikipedia relies on scholarly material rather than on anecdotes and testimonials found on web pages. Dozens of scientists could express their opinion that Geller has psychic powers, but if none of them can get those opinions published in peer reviewed scientific journals, Wikipedia has no choice but to ignore them. - LuckyLouie (talk) 20:10, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias Toward the Skeptical Side 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Uri Geller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150620234050/https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/israeli-psychic-uri-geller-thinks-save-newcastle-utd-022210457--spt.html to https://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/news/israeli-psychic-uri-geller-thinks-save-newcastle-utd-022210457--spt.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a phenomenal amount of repetition in this article. Aside from the obvious - eg: massive overlinking of James Randi - numerous statements, such as those concerning the opinions of watchmakers, are repeated time (sic) and again. I am loathe to get involved because I deal with enough crazies elsewhere but perhaps someone is prepared to take it on. - Sitush (talk) 06:35, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repetition 

message: I've been reverted on removing weasel wording from the lead, which had said that Geller "simulates" psychic powers, using the sources as an excuse maintain that bias. No, Randi simulates them, Geller fakes them. That's what the sources in the lead actually say. The lead was worded as if Geller were an honest stage magician and TV entertainer, while the sources say that he's been conning people by denying that he's a magician. — kwami (talk) 23:25, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The definition/meaning of simulation does not imply your change, which is better POV. Oxford: Simulation is a situation in which a particular set of conditions is created artificially in order to study or experience something that could exist in reality.(KIENGIR (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Simulate" vs "fake" 

message: From the section titled "Personal Life" comes the impression that he has none. Max2x4 (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  No personal life? 

message: Here is the original version of the lead before the spate of recent edits began: 
Please discuss changes to the lead here so that consensus can be reached. Thanks, - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  April 2024