545:
Do you have any sources from academics or other reliable sources discussing the group's history and/or pseudoscientific and/or fringe context? The organization is by no means a reliable source about itself. The above sources, troublingly, simply parrot the group's presentation of itself as a group of
228:
The Centre for
Fortean Zoology is not a notable organization. It is run from Jonathan Downes backyard. Downes wrote this Knowledge article himself as pure promotion and nearly all the sources on the article are primary sources from Downes himself. The article has struggled with reliable referencing
567:
BBC News are not reliable for paranormal claims nor are the
Telegraph or other news outlets. They write sensationalist articles without critical coverage, they are not neutral or reliable sources. People are attracted to the unknown and they play on that. There seems to be no academic sources that
670:
Passing, uncritical mentions aren't the same thing as in-depth coverage. Quoting somebody affiliated with the Centre isn't reporting on the history, organization and activities of the Centre; being the source for the token "the Yeti could still be out there" sound bite fails to meet
381:– I won't mince words: this organization peddles pseudoscientific nonsense, and I would prefer it not be given a platform. However, this organization's expertise in baseless hooey has been cited a surprisingly massive number of times by reliable sources. For example, BBC News (
515:
Looking through these, I note that nearly every one of these simply just briefly refers to Downes as the leader of the Centre and otherwise presents Downes and the group as experts rather than pseudoscience proponents. Of course, in reality, this is a fringe group
692:- the various mentions listed above are just that, mentions: mentions of the centre and their bizarre cryptid-related claims. I see no in-depth coverage of the organisation itself, which would lend itself to an encyclopedia article. Even putting
197:
568:
mention this organization. I can assure you Downes did write this article himself I was not wrong about that. Downes was fooling around on sock-puppets for years. The mass content on the article was written by
229:
for years. It's basically a promotion piece and lacks reliable in depth coverage from secondary sources. Jonathan Downes' article was recently deleted and I nominate that this article should be as well.
684:
628:
If you've got a reliable source discussing the history and sturcture of this fringe organization rather than the various blurbs promoting it above, I think we'd all like to see it.
191:
524:) that needs reliable and notable secondary coverage that describes them accurately. So far each one of these sources are simply promoting the organization (and so we have to keep
265:
454:
446:
299:
158:
487:
back in 2005, but this was his only contribution, and critically, literally no aspect about our current article is the same. This is akin to saying that an IP editor
282:
131:
126:
410:
316:
135:
532:
that links readers out to the Centre's site without comment. (Media uncritically parroting pseudoscientific claims from cryptozoology circles is nothing new—
118:
105:
481:', as the article's 11,000+ page views over the last two years and the amount of reliable sources that cite them indicate this is a plausible search term.
90:
696:
aside, there's very little here to show notability, and I think our standards should be even higher for organisations that push pseudoscientific woo.
408:
462:
440:
591:
etc. It is all promotional editing that happened years ago and conflict of interest. It's quite clear to me the article should be flushed.
412:
404:
212:
179:
434:
424:
465:
Essentially, while I hate that this organization is notable, they are clearly notable. If anything, I believe based on performing
444:
432:
610:
There are clearly multiple independent sources. We dont delete articles about organisations just because they peddle nonsense.
85:
78:
17:
173:
713:
662:
637:
619:
600:
555:
506:
373:
351:
325:
308:
291:
274:
256:
238:
60:
708:
442:
406:
371:
57:
416:
169:
99:
95:
122:
448:
418:
596:
344:
234:
219:
730:
501:
40:
114:
66:
426:
675:. Add that to the COI/sockpuppet concerns, and it's pretty plain that we're better off without this article.
483:
Furthermore, the nominator's claim that "Downes authored this article himself" is misleading at best: Downes
658:
521:
366:
53:
726:
680:
592:
337:
230:
185:
36:
456:
615:
493:
470:
473:
was wrongfully deleted. At the very least, however, as this discussion is currently heavily leaning
633:
551:
525:
252:
205:
529:
398:
394:
654:
384:
704:
414:
74:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
725:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
693:
676:
517:
466:
580:
611:
588:
396:
672:
629:
584:
576:
547:
386:
320:
303:
286:
269:
248:
569:
533:
478:
697:
152:
390:
528:
in mind). Some of these items are blatantly promoting the organization, like
388:
382:
392:
534:
we even have a little section on it over at our cryptozoology article
721:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
583:. Richard Freeman has also had about 4 Knowledge accounts
573:
488:
484:
148:
144:
140:
204:
575:"I am indeed Jon Downes". So Downes had two accounts
572:who has admitted on the talk-page to being Downes
266:list of Organizations-related deletion discussions
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
733:). No further edits should be made to this page.
649:per nom, especially the bit about about lacking
315:Note: This discussion has been included in the
298:Note: This discussion has been included in the
281:Note: This discussion has been included in the
264:Note: This discussion has been included in the
300:list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions
218:
8:
477:, this should be a redirect to the article '
283:list of England-related deletion discussions
106:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
317:list of Animal-related deletion discussions
314:
297:
280:
263:
579:and Lazarusx. Downes had another sock
7:
247:. Non-notable fringe organization.
653:coverage from reliable sources. --
469:for this organization the article
24:
489:wrote our article on Barack Obama
91:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
81:(AfD)? Read these primers!
750:
365:: Fails reliable sources.
115:Centre for Fortean Zoology
67:Centre for Fortean Zoology
714:13:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
685:04:18, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
663:01:50, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
638:05:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
620:22:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
601:17:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
556:16:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
507:15:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
411:), ABC News (Australia) (
374:14:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
352:22:56, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
326:22:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
309:22:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
292:22:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
275:22:51, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
257:22:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
239:22:33, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
61:02:44, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
723:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
336:, per noms reasoning.
79:Articles for deletion
530:this 2008 BBC report
359:Per nom's reasoning.
485:created the article
437:The Daily Telegraph
368:Sharath Abhivadyah
712:
328:
311:
294:
277:
96:Guide to deletion
86:How to contribute
741:
702:
700:
593:Psychologist Guy
522:WP:Pseudoscience
504:
498:
369:
348:
341:
323:
306:
289:
272:
231:Psychologist Guy
223:
222:
208:
156:
138:
76:
34:
749:
748:
744:
743:
742:
740:
739:
738:
737:
731:deletion review
698:
502:
496:TheTechnician27
494:
471:Jonathan Downes
459:The Independent
367:
346:
339:
321:
304:
287:
270:
165:
129:
113:
110:
73:
70:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
747:
745:
736:
735:
717:
716:
687:
665:
643:
642:
641:
640:
623:
622:
604:
603:
561:
560:
559:
558:
540:
539:
538:
537:
510:
509:
482:
464:
417:), Swissinfo (
376:
360:
354:
330:
329:
312:
295:
278:
260:
259:
226:
225:
162:
109:
108:
103:
93:
88:
71:
69:
64:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
746:
734:
732:
728:
724:
719:
718:
715:
710:
706:
701:
695:
691:
688:
686:
682:
678:
674:
669:
666:
664:
660:
656:
655:SilverTiger12
652:
648:
645:
644:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:
625:
624:
621:
617:
613:
609:
606:
605:
602:
598:
594:
590:
586:
582:
578:
574:
571:
566:
563:
562:
557:
553:
549:
544:
543:
542:
541:
535:
531:
527:
523:
519:
514:
513:
512:
511:
508:
505:
500:
499:
497:
490:
486:
480:
479:Cryptozoology
476:
472:
468:
460:
452:
451:National Post
438:
430:
422:
402:
380:
377:
375:
372:
370:
364:
361:
358:
355:
353:
350:
349:
343:
342:
335:
332:
331:
327:
324:
318:
313:
310:
307:
301:
296:
293:
290:
284:
279:
276:
273:
267:
262:
261:
258:
254:
250:
246:
243:
242:
241:
240:
236:
232:
221:
217:
214:
211:
207:
203:
199:
196:
193:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
171:
168:
167:Find sources:
163:
160:
154:
150:
146:
142:
137:
133:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
111:
107:
104:
101:
97:
94:
92:
89:
87:
84:
83:
82:
80:
75:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
722:
720:
689:
667:
650:
646:
607:
581:BillPetrovic
564:
526:WP:PROFRINGE
495:
492:
474:
458:
450:
447:), CBC News
436:
428:
420:
401:The Guardian
400:
378:
362:
356:
345:
338:
333:
244:
227:
215:
209:
201:
194:
188:
182:
176:
166:
72:
49:
47:
31:
28:
630::bloodofox:
589:Tallowghast
548::bloodofox:
503:(Talk page)
455:), Al.com (
249::bloodofox:
192:free images
677:XOR'easter
612:Rathfelder
727:talk page
694:WP:FRINGE
585:Doctor3uk
577:Jondownes
546:experts.
518:WP:Fringe
467:WP:BEFORE
429:The Times
322:Spiderone
305:Spiderone
288:Spiderone
271:Spiderone
37:talk page
729:or in a
651:in depth
570:Lazarusx
159:View log
100:glossary
39:or in a
699:ƒirefly
673:WP:NORG
565:Comment
198:WP refs
186:scholar
132:protect
127:history
77:New to
690:Delete
668:Delete
647:Delete
475:Delete
449:, the
363:Delete
357:Delete
334:Delete
245:Delete
170:Google
136:delete
58:(talk)
50:delete
213:JSTOR
174:books
153:views
145:watch
141:links
16:<
681:talk
659:talk
634:talk
616:talk
608:Keep
597:talk
552:talk
379:Keep
253:talk
235:talk
206:FENS
180:news
149:logs
123:talk
119:edit
536:).)
457:),
435:),
427:),
421:IGN
419:),
399:),
347:iro
220:TWL
157:– (
54:PMC
52:. ♠
707:·
703:(
683:)
661:)
636:)
618:)
599:)
587:,
554:)
520:,
491:.
463:).
445:,
443:,
441:,
433:,
425:,
415:,
413:,
409:,
407:,
405:,
397:,
395:,
393:,
391:,
389:,
387:,
385:,
383:,
340:He
319:.
302:.
285:.
268:.
255:)
237:)
200:)
151:|
147:|
143:|
139:|
134:|
130:|
125:|
121:|
56:♠
711:)
709:c
705:t
679:(
657:(
632:(
614:(
595:(
550:(
516:(
461:(
453:(
439:(
431:(
423:(
403:(
251:(
233:(
224:)
216:·
210:·
202:·
195:·
189:·
183:·
177:·
172:(
164:(
161:)
155:)
117:(
102:)
98:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.