Jump to content

Talk:List of reported UFO sightings

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Redirects

[edit]

The following articles have been deleted and now redirect here:

The following articles have been deleted completely but at one time redirected here:

As that changes other editors are welcome to ammend this post, Rjjiii(talk) 00:41, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

Just wondering why the triangle in the image has 4 sides. lol. It looks more like the wedge shape of a hypersonic aircraft. VoidHalo (talk) 08:44, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blurry photograph of a triangular object with the same outline as the lead's infographic
This model—created from styrofoam, wire, and lights to recreate the account of the photographer's partner—was subjected to rigorous photographic analysis by ufologists who believed (and may still believe) it to be genuine.[1]
I was attempting to capture the outline of a famous photograph, likely of a model, but presumed to be true for years by ufologists and the UK government. If that is overthinking how to make a triangle, and I have overthought some things before, then others are welcome to download and edit the SVG from the commons. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 18:36, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think I know what photograph you're talking about. I was interested in UFOlogy as a kid in the 90's when that stuff was big, and no doubt saw it at some point. Probably multiple times. Either way, regardless of my joke, this was actually a well done photograph and a great contribution. At first glance, it could easily pass for a real UFO photograph (whether hoaxed or otherwise). VoidHalo (talk) 00:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

UAP

[edit]

Per recent edits: How should this article (and other high-level UFO articles) present the term UAP? WP:RS seem to treat it largely as a synonym for UFO. Rjjiii (talk) 07:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the existing definition is fine. It acknowledges the WP:RECENTISM of UAP, but stops short of treating it as The Superduper Latest Scientifical Official Update to "UFO". No need to cast aside the longstanding historical context of "UFO" in favor of the latest fad word. - LuckyLouie (talk) 13:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maxial UFO

[edit]

Good morning, Rjjiii. May I find a list of the not reliable fonts? Why is Leslie Kean not fiable? Who said so? Mcorrlo (talk) 06:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The cited story authored by Vanessa Fidalgo (which is essentially promoting her book UFO Sightseeings in Portugal) isn't an independent source either. Don't feel bad, finding sources that aren't WP:SENSATIONAL or WP:PROFRINGE has always been a problem at this list article. - LuckyLouie (talk) 18:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Right. For a fringe viewpoint, Wikipedia's guidelines call for sourcing from the outside. This review highlights some of the issue with relying on eyewitness descriptions of UFOs from pilots. Rjjiii (talk) 02:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even so, I doubt that Leslie Kean is an unreliable source. She's a journalist. And if they don't accept her stories, why is a crook  like Brian Dunning, a speculator, constantly quoted? I can't find a single case in which Dunning has found a legitimate UFO, perhaps because from the start he  wanted to prove that there are no UFOs anywhere.
I have Kean's book, and it seems to me that she has chosen the cases she writes about very carefully.  The question remains. Who determines the reliability of Leslie Kean or others? May I find a list? Mcorrlo (talk) 07:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]