User talk:65.163.115.114

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Will-'o-the-wisps of the swamp

The fact is that Will-o'-the-wisps have taken on a larger connotation than that with which they were originally charged. Since the context of the coining of the neologism was Great Britain, it was only natural that the Will-o'-the-wisp was associated with the moorlands (there are no deserts in England). Today, however, the American Heritage Dictionary, the Oxford Comprendium of Folklore, the Columbia Encyclopedia, and the Houghton-Mifflin Thesaurus all agree that will-o'-the-wisps have been used to describe phenomena beyond their parochial beginnings. If you can point to a reliable source which indicates that this is not the case, please do so. ScienceApologist (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

I've requested article protection for BOTH articles, until all disputes are settled. Really do appreciate your assisstance ScienceApologist. 65.163.115.114 (talk) 05:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm missing something, but I don't see a conflict that warrants protection of either page. Protection is typically used as a last resort in the nastiest content disputes, and I don't see that here. I have full confidence that the issue can be resolved through discussion. If you feel that I've misunderstood what's going on, though, just show me some diffs. Thanks for all your work on this matter. Canderson7 (talk) 21:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Original research

In terms of what can be verified, any first-hand accounts you hear from locals at each of these instances would not be eligible for inclusion at Wikipedia. However, one thing you can do is take a picture of the areas and release them to GFDL. Then we can include those in the relevant articles. All textual resources, however, must conform to the points outlined at reliable source and original research. ScienceApologist (talk) 15:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)