Talk:Bermuda Triangle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Echo has identified Bermuda Triangle as a foreign language featured article. You may be able to improve this article with information from the Ukrainian language Wikipedia.

	This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.

It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.

See also: /Archive1

Contents 1 Chronological list 2 Columbus 3 Paranormal Claims 4 added cleanup-date template 5 Flight 19 and Star Tiger sections 6 Charles Berlitz 7 Criticism of Lawrence Kusche 8 Funny ... 9 Archive

[edit] Chronological list

The chronological list is very scrappy, containing real mysteries, fakes and 'since-been-explained's - but without saying which are what. _{That sentence was also very scrappy :)} .I'm going to put thumbnail details to each name, if I can find sources (that ship losing passengers - not even the ship's name? Come on!) Totnesmartin 15:19, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Columbus

The article claims that Columbus and his crewmen saw various strange things, but the link given doesn't confirm this. Is there a reference (preferably not a BT book or website) that confirms this? Is his diary or log in print? Totnesmartin 15:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paranormal Claims

Intro section: If the claims are in between quotation marks, shouldn't there be a citation for these "quotes"? Otherwise the quotation marks ought to be removed.Anrie 13:24, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Good point. It should be re-worded to say something like:

Claims in favour of a 'paranormal' explanation include: the possibility of a time warp or dimensional vortex; hoistile activity by extraterrestrials, or inhabitants of Atlantis; - or something like that. Totnesmartin 20:57, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Done Totnesmartin

[edit] added cleanup-date template

I added a cleanup-date template to this page; while there's little NPoV issues left, the vestiges of it can still be found in bad grammar, general organization, extraneous comments, and informal tone. It needs some serious cleanup work.

I thought about using the story template instead, but decided on cleanup-date.

—auk 01:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and some information needs to incorporated from other articles into this one. Such as dates and times for some disappearances. Yes, they often have their own article with this information. That's not the point. It makes for too much inconsistency when you have to go to three or four different sources for shared information on things that basic. Shadowrun 19:32, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Flight 19 and Star Tiger sections

Now that these two sections link to their respective articles, is there any need for the sections to be as long as they are? They could be cut down to (eg) a dozen lines each or something. Totnesmartin 22:31, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Berlitz

Doesn't the criticism of Charles Berlitz come a little early in the article? Reading through the article until "Kusche's The Bermuda Triangle Mystery—Solved" you finally encounter a criticism to his work, but there's nothing written about Berlitz himself in the article to warrant it. Isn't it an issue of equality? To provide criticism you first have to have something to criticize, you can't expect the reader to automatically know who you're talking about. Shadowrun 19:22, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Criticism of Lawrence Kusche

He is criticised for "holding to his claim that 'nothing out of the ordinary' regularly occurred in and around the area, and yet several times admitting certain cases lacked conventional rational explanation (most notably in the Star Tiger and DC-3 cases)". Sorry, but the Star Tiger and DC-3 cases are exceptional, not regular events, proving that 'nothing out of the ordinary' does regularly happen. If Kusche had said that nothing out of the ordinary ever occurred, the critic would have a point. Subsequently, I do not think such evidently weak criticism should be in the article

I corresponded with Kusche in 1977 and he emphasised that publishers only want books that will make them money - they often do not care about facts or accuracy. Because Kusche was dedicated to accuracy and objectivity (regardless of whether he made some errors, or of his research's conclusions), his efforts resulted in a book that was "dull", wasn't "sexy" and therefore had a hard time getting published. He was even told by some publishers that they would not publish "a book of knocks", however well researched, because it might harm the sales of a garbage-ridden pro-Triangle book. To sum up: The BT is a mystery, like a 1000 others, drummed up by the greedy and the gullible and perpetuated by people who are too captivated by claptrap or bored stiff with reality to realise that. If the Triangle doesn't exist, somebody would have invented it. And they did! Sorry (again), but I've been a fan of the paranormal for over 30 years and as much as I yearn - even need - to prove something exists that would get up the noses of stuffy, narrow-minded academics and scientists, all I've EVER come across is the foul-smelling stuff you find in cowsheds. Rikstar 18:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Funny ...

Funny, I've been a skeptic, a freethinker, and a scientifically trained mathematician for damn near as long. Why do I get tired of of being thought a "stuffy, narrow-minded academic and scientist" simply because I reject all spiritual belief and all pseudoscience like the Bermuda Triangle & psychic phenomena? How many times have New Agers screamed at me, "You're not open minded!" The Christians only condemn me to burn in hell for all eternity. Life's rough.

dino 04:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Save it for livejournal mate, this page is for discussing the article. Totnesmartin 10:30, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Dino, "stuffy..." in my comment should have been in quotation marks. I'm actually on your side. As a newbie, Totnesmartin, I thank you for informing me about the livejournal, mate. Please note my first comments directly concern the article. Rikstar 13:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

I know, that's why I didn't criticise - your bit was relevant to the article. Dino, however, is just ranting about people calling him names. Totnesmartin 11:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Archive

this talk page is getting quite long, with lots of finished discussions. I'm going to archive it at the weekend, if nobody objects. Totnesmartin 18:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. Totnesmartin 11:04, 9 December 2006 (UTC)