Talk:Main Page: Difference between revisions

Line 22:

::Possibly, this is a bit vague so I'll give a concrete example of both. Would [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal%20Raymond%20Rife Royal Raymond Rife] do for Ikwipedia? The Rife device is a lot less off-the-wall than the things that are currently listed under [[Exotic technology]] since its design is mostly known (though there's argument about the details) and doesn't defy any known laws of physics and it's just whether it's effective at destroying germs that's disputed, but it is very unsuited to Wikipedia because mainstream sources tend not to discuss it except to say that there's no formal evidence that it works, and it's in the ridiculous position of having to rely largely on 1930s newspaper articles even though the inadmissible sources (websites with photos of Rife's letters and lab notes and so on) often demonstrate that the newspaper articles are wrong. [[User:Millipede|Millipede]] ([[User talk:Millipede|talk]]) 22:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

::: Thanks so much for your perceptive observations and question. I'll try to answer each of your questions (and the one below) in turn over the next few days as well as make edits elsewhere on the wiki (some of which were already planned on my part) to try to illustrate my points.

=Additional information=

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 ::Possibly, this is a bit vague so I'll give a concrete example of both.  Would [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal%20Raymond%20Rife Royal Raymond Rife] do for Ikwipedia?  The Rife device is a lot less off-the-wall than the things that are currently listed under [[Exotic technology]] since its design is mostly known (though there's argument about the details) and doesn't defy any known laws of physics and it's just whether it's effective at destroying germs that's disputed, but it is very unsuited to Wikipedia because mainstream sources tend not to discuss it except to say that there's no formal evidence that it works, and it's in the ridiculous position of having to rely largely on 1930s newspaper articles even though the inadmissible sources (websites with photos of Rife's letters and lab notes and so on) often demonstrate that the newspaper articles are wrong.  [[User:Millipede|Millipede]] ([[User talk:Millipede|talk]]) 22:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
+::: Thanks so much for your perceptive observations and question. I'll try to answer each of your questions (and the one below) in turn over the next few days as well as make edits elsewhere on the wiki (some of which were already planned on my part) to try to illustrate my points.
 =Additional information=