Talk:Unexplained disappearances

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on November 23, 2006. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

Paranormal Portal

This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics 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.

Start

This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.

Mythology Portal

This article is supported by WikiProject Mythology .

This project provides a central approach to Mythology-related subjects on Wikipedia.
Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.

Stub

This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

Remind me to come back and sort this page out. Totnesmartin 22:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] First things first

OK, lets get something straight, nobody is reserving links, and nobody is out to get this page. But, unless people get it in order, somebody probably will be out to get it. There are some extremely pedantic users out there and a lot of people go out of their way to slap

{{Citation}}

tags on every sentence in a paranormal article in order to make them appear discredited. It's only a matter of time that one of those users gets around here and stirs up a deletion posy of tags ever sentence as dubious. Trust me, they are far more of a pain than use so-called censors.

This page is listed on the New Pages section of the Paranormal Project page, but it clearly isn't ready yet and so shouldn't have been listed. Please read the following guidelines and policies. They will help you understand where other editors are coming from when they delete sections form this page or change it in ways that you might not like.

WP:V - Everything that is key to the page must be verifiable in an external source WP:RS - Said source needs to be reliable (hobby pages are prone to being deleted, as are pages that make wild or exaggerated claims). WP:OR - You can't put your own ideas or opinions on a page, it has to be somebody else's (see above)

You must also be very careful not to misuse or misstate things. For example, the First-Four is a valid story of paranormal vanishing because it was told and published, but, if you wish to include it, it must be made clear that it was a false story and that it never actually happened.

I suggest that somebody goes down to their local library and check out a copy of Jerome Clark's Unexplained. There are three or four god examples of paranormal vanishing in it (though not named as such).

perfectblue 08:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fact Check

This page needs a fact check. For example, the First-Fourth Norfolk Regiment did not vanish from Gallipoli because there never was a First-Fourth Norfolk Regiment to begin with.

There was a First four battalion of the Royal Norfolk regement and they did fight at Gallipoli, but they did not vanish. They were transfered to another front late in 1915/early in 1916, a fact which is supported by British war records.

perfectblue 15:56, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The unit concerned was the "Sandringham Pals" - they were lost after attacking Turkish positions, were wiped out and lay undiscovered until after the war. See this: [1] Totnesmartin 20:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

The 'Sandringham Pals' did not 'disappear' either - their bodies were accounted for after the war. Their deaths were not inexplicable - they were killed by Turkish soldiers. Trench warfare often led to individuals or even entire units being 'lost' between the lines'; it was not uncommon for men to be blasted to atoms or the dead to be so disfigured that identification was impossible. This entry represents a valid line of enquiry, but it needs an Editor who is capable of consistent logic. Wikipedia seems to have no means to ensure that entries are steered by people who understand the topics under discussion.

ghosttracker 4:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

The unit mentioned in the article was the first-four. The unit that was killed was the first-fifth, the two stories are quite different. Especially as the former was made up by solider from New Zealand.

perfectblue 07:27, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I know, but perhaps the "disappearing into a cloud" story, having gained circulation, needs a home on this article so it can be nailed. Even if it never happened, it's still notable as myth or folklore. Totnesmartin 15:50, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, the people who edit this article are more interested in reserving the external links area for their friends's websites than in seeking the participation of genuine contributors. The last edit to that area was made by some guy who seems to be mainly interested in chinese culture - maybe he is chinese and struggling with the quirks of the English language? He certainly understands nothing about the subject being debated here.

User:172.143.166.70

NOTE: Even more than a fact check, this article needs an editor who understands the subject. Wikipedia's self-appointed censors have a nasty tendency to eliminate (or trash) input from British users. It's not a nice thing to say, but it is what happens here - we all know it, but few dare to speak out.

User:172.143.166.70

Please sign your comments and keep them in order; newest last, older first. This helps up to see where one comment ends and the next begins, as well as to see how many individual people are commenting.

perfectblue 08:21, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I'll try and tackle it when time permits. Probably the weekend. _{(I'll use American spellings so no-one realises I'm a Brit!)} Totnesmartin 12:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added The Norfolks, Oliver Larch/Lerch/Thomas/cobley and all to the veracity section. That's a few well-known stories, are there any more? Travis Walton perhaps? Benjamin Bathurst? there's a question of how big the article becomes if we cram every story we can find into it. Totnesmartin 23:01, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] convert to category...

This article almost seems like it should be a category instead of an article. Has anyone done research into "paranormal vanishing"? Clearly people have done research in specific cases... but as a field of study? Thoughts? ---J.S (t|c) 00:20, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

There are several references to vanishing in Clark's Unexplained under the headings of the names of the people involved and under teleportation. However, in most cases he determins them to be hoaxes tracable back to a short story wirtten a very long time ago and changed slightly (in some cases peple vanish, in other's they are snatched, other times they drop into other dimensions).

On their own, I don't think that the cases are notable enough, but together they might be. I vote against deletion on this grounds.

perfectblue 08:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Article and category! The article is required in order to describe the phenomena and to explain the difference to Alien abduction and to show the phenomna's characteristic ( no UFO, but someimes a strange cloud).

It may be possible, that the name "paranormal vanishing" is incommon. But there are many high contradictional cases of this phenomena showing the described characteristic.

Please sign your comments perfectblue 13:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

"High contradictional cases"? What do you mean? Totnesmartin 12:22, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Idiosyncratic term?

This article has something of the smell of original research (or at the very least, a unique terminology). Can anyone provide evidence that this phrase or concept is in common use? Google provides two hits, only one of which is relevant. Deleuze 16:31, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

The nearest I can think of is a 1981 book called Vanishings by Michael Harrison. It was heavily slanted towards a paranormal explanation - perhaps this is where the term Paranormal Vanishings originates. If only I still had my copy. Totnesmartin 16:42, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I've heard of cases of paranormal vanishing, but I've never heard the term paranormal vanishing actually being used. I've got a book on my desk right now with a dozen incidents listed in it, but some are in the section on teleportation, and most of the rest are either listed under locations (eg the bermuda triangle) or the names of the individual cases (eg the disaperance of ....). I don't recal ever hearing of proponents of the phenomena like Keal use it either.

perfectblue 18:21, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Looks like it should be renamed - but to what?Totnesmartin 20:25, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Against: but only if a lot more work is done to bring the page up to scratch. perfectblue 08:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
Against: paranormal vanishing shows its own characteristics and therefore the article should be kept! 89.49.87.130
Against: as above, and also that the stories of disappearances, even when refuted, keep recurring in new forms; looks like a form of folklore, and so notable on that basis. Totnesmartin 14:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
Against: for reasons mentioned above, as well as the fact that this subject is well-covered at other places on the internet, such as About.com's paranormal pages ("Vanished! Unexplained Disappearances" and "Into Thin Air") and deserves to be adequately described in Wikipedia's paranormal section. Cynthia Sue Larson 17:36, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paranormal "Vanishing" term is in use

The term "vanishing" in the paranormal context is in regular use in the monthly ezine, "RealityShifters News," in which reports are made by people around the world describing things that vanish and later sometimes reappear. This includes objects, buildings, structures, people, and so forth. These stories are documented fully in the "your stories" pages at the realityshifters.com site.

"Vanishing" IS in use - the dispute is with "Paranormal vanishing" as a phrase. Could you put a link to this phrase being used? Google has only 2 hits for it. Totnesmartin 20:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

It was my impression that as long as the term 'vanishing' is being used in the context of an inexplicable, paranormal type incident (as in a reality shift), that counts as paranormal vanishing. I have not seen the term "paranormal vanishing" used much otherwise. Cynthia Sue Larson 22:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem is that no-one's going to type "paranormal vanishing" into the search box if it's not an established phrase, which means no-one will see the article. It needs to be put where it can be found. Totnesmartin 23:00, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Useful title - the search continues

Internet search returns:

"Mysterious disappearances" - 48,900
"Strange disappearances" - 10,800
"Mysterious vanishings" - 529
"Bizarre disappearances" - 302
"Unusual disappearances" - 158
"Strange vanishings" - 134
"Paranormal disappearances" - 100
"Weird disappearances" - 89
"Mystery disappearances" - 86
"Weird vanishings" - 8
"Bizarre vanishings" - 7
"Mystery vanishings" - 3
"Paranormal vanishings" - 2
"Unusual vanishings" - 0 _{I think this one's out...}

I think the title should be one of the top two, and redirect all the others. What does anyone else think? Totnesmartin 23:23, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I feel that "Paranormal disappearances" would be the best cover all term to use even if it's not a widely used term. Whether for a page or a category. "Mysterious disappearances" is too policey. It's bet that most of those 48,900 Google hits are criminal cases, eg murders and abductions. The same for Strange disappearances. Where's looking at missing persons cases with no paranormal involvement with that title.

perfectblue 08:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

looks like you're right. "Mysterious disappearances" has some paranormal site returns but lots of other stuff - even a sports report! "Strange disappearances" is more promising though. the first 13 returns are all for paranormal books or sites. maybe go with that? Totnesmartin 15:13, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I think "Strange disappearances" is pretty good. --Careax 03:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Unexplained disappearances? Anybody?Davkal 03:40, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

That's a good one. 33,000 returns, and most of the first page is "paranormal" sites - there's a Missing Persons site though at number 2. Why didn't I think of Unexplained when doing that search list? I've got 2 books called unexplained, and I had the entire set of "the unexplained" magazine... duh. Totnesmartin

Vanished: Unexplained disappearances is one of my favorites. About.com has a paranormal section with this name, and another titled Vanished: Into Thin Air. Both of those names are descriptive, clear, and easy for people to find. Cynthia Sue Larson 17:43, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Shall we go with Unexplained Disappearances then? actually I'll put it to the project... Totnesmartin 21:26, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Given the current content, I think "Unexplained disappearances" is too broad. "List of unexplained disappearances" * might be a better name for the article currently titled List of people who have disappeared yet the content of that list has little in common with the content of this article.
*plus links in the lead to other lists/categories (ships etc)
If this article were renamed "Paranormal disappearances", would any of the current content (other than the lead) have to be altered or removed? 58.8.5.244 (talk) 05:14, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Additional Section

There are two additional sections that I think would benefit the article.

The first would be a section on the traditions associated with people vanishing. From folkore there are lots of accounts (I don't now enough about them to write it) of people vanishing through Faerie rings, or walking the wrong way round the rings (this is all from memory). Some writers have even drawn a comparison with modern-day alien abduction and have noted various similarities between modern aliens and historical faerie-folk (kidnapping humans being one of them). One major difference is that in the past people tendded to vanish for good (or a long time) whereas alien abduction is for the most part short-term. The notion of [changeling]s (vanished and replaced by something else) might also be of interest here. And again the notion of an alien interbreeding program (associated with the abduction phenomenon) has similarities with the traditions of the changeling. I think something could be mode of this long tradition of paranormal kidnappings which persists to the present day.

Secondly, I think there could be a good section on paranormal vanishings in fiction. Picnic at Hanging Rock being one good example, and the story of Rip van Winkle (although not from his side of the story) would be another. Davkal 15:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Will do tomorrow - although last time I said that, the article was deleted before I got home! _{or perhaps it vanished? ;)} Totnesmartin 19:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Examples

The current section dealing with examples of vanishings has a fair amount of detail concerning three cases, all of which have been shown to be non-cases, while a tiny paragraph skips over two possible cases which have not been fully resolved. It might be better to include genuine mystery cases for which no explanation exists as, presumably, that's the actual subject of the article.Davkal 02:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Gimme a chance, I only just put them there! :) This article is definitely a "work in progress" and still listed for deletion. Feel free to add both refuted-but-still-recurring stories (notable as folklore) and other still-unexplained vanishings; BUT they must be NPOV and properly sourced or the delete monster will get us. Totnesmartin 11:45, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Project Paranormal agreed a while ago that hoaxes were just as valid as real cases when it comes to inclusion, plus including them helps to keep anti-paranormal freaks (people who object to anything marked paranormal on basic principle because they don't believe in it) off of our backs a little longer. Feel free to add some good cases of real instances, but please be careful not to make them sound too fantastic as this tends to atrack attacks from skeptics.

perfectblue 11:51, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fairy or Faerie

This is confusing. To me "fairy" is a being that inhabits "faerie" - the land of the fairies. But if WB yeats spells it differently thenperhaps we'd better go with that. Opinions anyone? Totnesmartin 11:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

For some reason, in much writing about folklore they spell it faerie. Perhaps this is to distinguish the concept from the modern (Walt Disney) notion of a fairy, which is quite different.Davkal 15:06, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The two spellings appear to be interchangeable these days. Which one shall we go with? Totnesmartin 15:11, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

(late reply)Just for consistency, I suggest we use Fairy, since that's where the main article rests. ---J.S ^(T/C) 18:33, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Could people take care not to use sources like personal webpages on geocities and lycos. Generally they are not considered appropriate for the purposes of WP:RS and they tend to attack the wrong sort of attention to a page (people out to discredit it). If you use such a page as a source, check the bottom if that page and see if it lists any books as sources, then cut the page out entirely and list its sources as your sources. As you're reading a page based on these books, its fair to claim them as your sources (take care that the page writer hasn't read things into them that wasn't there though).

perfectblue 11:57, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

take care that the page writer hasn't read things into them - but how could we tell without the book? I will try, however. Totnesmartin 12:41, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes the source might be a webpage, or a book that's in your local library.

perfectblue 13:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hoaxes

The two examples currently cited as hoaxes aren't hoaxes. They are, according to the article, purely fictitious accounts, published as purely fictitious accounts, and which came into popular consciousness as true in the manner of, say, an Urban Myth. A hoax, in this case, would be where someone deliberately faked their own disappearance in a manner suggesting paranormal involvement with some intent to deceive.

This also means that the statement immediately preceding the cases listed, stating that "many cases have been shown to have been hoaxes", may not be correct.Davkal 16:07, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

The story of David Lang was published in the July 1953 edition of Fate Magazine by Stuart Palmer. Palmer claimed to have gotten the story from Lang's daughter. Since Lang never existed in the first place he couldn't possibly have had a daughter. This means that either the person claiming to be Lang's daughter was a hoaxer getting one over on Palmer, or that Palmer invented the daughter and was hoaxing readers. Either way, it was a hoax inspired by that fictional story.

I would take issues about a hoaxer faking their own disappearance. It's far probably more likely that a journalist etc would invent somebody else's disappearance.

perfectblue 16:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so one may be a hoax; although given that the detail that makes it a hoax is missing from the article, perhaps that should go in to explain why it is being so labelled. I also accept that my explanation of a hoax was only one possible (perhaps unlikely scenario) but nothing much turns on that. The point is that there has to be an attempt to deceive (e.g the Lang case) and so we still have the "many cases" claim resting on merely one hoax.Davkal 17:05, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I've added in the details about why the David Lang case was a hoax, which I hope is clear now. I only added one case of a hoax because you only need one or two examples. There might be 200 cases, but you don't need to include them all. I'm not going to babysit this page, it needs to be a team effort not my personal editorial. I've got to let other people add other stories that are hoaxes.

perfectblue 17:44, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Stuart Palmer claimed that David Lang's daughter Sarah told him the story, supplying examples of her and her father's handwriting. An independent analysis by the American Society of Document Examiners showed that the handwriting of both Langs was written by Palmer. Nobody else has ever found Sarah Lang or any record of her. Totnesmartin 17:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

So, it's agreed. It was a hoax and not an urban myth.

perfectblue 18:12, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Extra bit I just came across: bierce is said to have based his fiction on a real case, that of Orion Williamson [2]. Wether that case is a hoax too I don't know yet. curiously the tale says that at the spot where Lang/Williamson disappeared from, a coircle of grass turned yellow after the incident. This brings us back to fairy lore. Go figure. Totnesmartin 18:19, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Better intro (maybe)

I've written an intro which I think improves the current one (but then I would think that, wouldn't I?)

Paranormal vanishing is a neologism describing the reputed unexplainable disappearance of objects, animals or people without apparent reason or cause, or in circumstances that could indicate the involvement of the paranormal.

Although many of these events can be explained in conventional terms, there are some instances of vanishing that have no such explanation as yet.

There are also many stories of vanishing in folklore, features of which may recur in modern-day vanishng reports.

Any comments? Totnesmartin 11:30, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I like it. Davkal 22:46, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paranormal appearance

Who knows more about people and things, that suddenly appear? Please expand!

try Apport. We are still expanding the main theme here. Totnesmartin 22:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the following (new) section and put it here. is this off topic or the other side of the coin?

Paranormal appearance

It should be noted, that there is also about the contraversinory penomena the suddenly appearence of persons and things reported. So there are some reports of people, which seem not to come from our time. (expand)

I think this article has enough on its plate without having unsourced assertions added.Totnesmartin 22:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC) (again)

[edit] edit error - help!

Somehow, nearly all the links (both wiki and in line cites, etc) have been converted to plain text. This needs reverting, asap. Totnesmartin 21:32, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

article has been reverted to a previous working version. I have made all the changes I think were made since that version so the article should be as it was but with links workingDavkal 21:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Paranormal vanishing vanishes

This article has disappeared into the fourth dimension and turned into Unexplained disappearances, as per discussions above. Totnesmartin 22:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Technically, that would be transmogrification, not disappearance. --Chr.K. 07:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] REDO IT PROPERLY, PLEASE (and no, I am not "yelling")

An encyclopedic article should be as "objective" as possible (even though perfect objectivity is, most likely, a myth itself). That means that an article on "unexplained disappearances" should actually mention *unexplained* disappearances, in at least the same number as the "hoaxes" listed.

And there ARE unexplained disappearances, all around the world, believe me.

I do believe you. That's why we have to reference the bloody things, all of them. We'll start with the disappearance of your name, Nameless Wandering Poster Dude. --Chr.K. 07:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Japanese article

I added a link to ja.wikipedia.org's kamikakushi article, and figured that I ought to explain it here for people who don't understand Japanese. The term, literally translated, means "hidden by the spirits", and refers to people just vanishing for no reason (as with unexplained disappearances, though, there're lots of theories and stories that probably aren't true involving ghosts and monsters and aliens and alternate dimensions). Pretty much the same thing.

203.116.91.80 07:32, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Norfolk regiments: story "of spurious origins"?

According to this, at least in appearance perfectly respectable website, it originated in a DISPATCH written by Sir Ian Hamilton on December 11th, 1915, in which he himself called it "a very mysterious thing":

[3]

The truth - or rather, the supposed truth - was found seven years alter.

But I don't think a military dispatch qualifies as "spurious".

[edit] CALENTURE (People lost at sea under mysterious circumstances)

CALENTURE (People lost at sea under mysterious circumstances)

Question: Could calenture explain the disappearance of a ship’s whole crew?

During the past half century, many if not most large ocean going merchant ships have air-conditioned accommodation blocks and navigation bridges. The accidental loss of sailors overboard is unlikely, the ships are large and the crew are well contained within the accommodation. Any mysterious disappearance can only be explained by two reasons, either suicide or murder, however, there could be a third reason, that of calenture.

Calenture is described in some old medical books as "a disease suffered by sailors within the tropics, characterised by delirium in which the seaman fancies the sea is an inviting place and is compelled to jump into it"

Swift mentioned calenture in Moby Dick "So by a calenture misled, the mariner with rapture sees ,on the smooth ocean’s azure bed, enamell’d fields and verdant trees”

A study published in the British Journal of Medical Psychology in the 1980’s suggested that this illusion was as common as ever, especially in clear, hot weather under calm conditions with few distractions.

I have always been interested in this phenomenon as it happened to me when I was a second mate on board an oil tanker in the 1950’s

It was a Sunday afternoon; we were sailing in the Indian Ocean. It was calm and warm, clear cloudless blue sky merged with a clear uninterrupted blue sea. I was keeping the afternoon watch and quite alone on the bridge. There were no other crew to be seen. Sunday afternoon at sea was a restful time. Without realising, I suddenly found myself standing on the starboard navigation light platform outboard of the bridge wing and leaning out over the sea. With a start, I scrambled back onto the bridge wing and ran into the wheelhouse. Literally shaking with fright, I stayed within the confines of the wheelhouse until the end of my watch.

The Chief Officer who relieved me did not believe my story; neither did anybody else on board. I never spoke of the matter again.

I believe that I had experienced calenture, and luckily, had got away with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightmm (talk • contribs) 12:39, 15 February 2008 (UTC)