punchiop.blogg.se - Chander pahar book dingonek

is part of the effort by creationists to overthrow the theory of evolution and teaching of science by any means possible". Slatersteven ( talk) 17:23, 11 January 2019 (UTC) Loxton and Prothero have a chapter in Abominable Science dedicated to how this entity is essentially a construct created and promoted by Young Earth creationist cryptozoologists, although it appears to stem ultimately from some kind of regional folklore complex (likely similar to what's going on here).

This just makes the page look very silly and very biased (not in a pro-science way either, folklore is a science). May well be of interest to YEC, its also of interest to Cryptozoologists who are not YEC and folklorists. tronvillain ( talk) 19:58, 11 January 2019 (UTC) Mokele-mbembe Jordan, who was the big game hunter who's account Bronson was repeating. :bloodofox: ( talk) 17:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC) Just thought I'd point out that the Maclean's article is mostly a reprint of an article by J. It's really looking like there isn't any. Of course, I'm still looking for reliable, independent coverage of this topic to get this all in context. – dlthewave ☎ 03:07, 11 January 2019 (UTC) No problem. As you pointed out, it's unlikely that this issue can be resolved without independent expert sources. Since the article only covers the fringe theory itself and does not include any mainstream views, I've tagged it with the Fringe Theories template. :bloodofox: ( talk) 20:47, 10 January 2019 (UTC) Thank you for the cleanup effort. See, for example, Loxton and Prothero's commentary on Mokele-mbembe. It would appear some sort of tradition about said creature exists around the Lake Victoria area, but to say so would be WP:OR, and it's just as likely that there wasn't such a traction regarding lake monsters at all until colonialists started looking for one. However, as you can see, this material badly requires an independent expert source-preferably an academic specializing in the region-to make sense of it. I've recently rewritten this article by way of the few descriptions of this creature from non-fringe sources ( cryptozoologists). Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 09:43, 12 April 2011 (UTC) Rewrite Launched If you question the notability, please take the article to AfD. NickGrayLOL ( talk ) 22:29, 11 April 2011 (UTC) I added a source containing good information on dingonek, including historical circumstances. I have therefore nominated it to be deleted under the Wikipedia Deletion Policy. It has been well over two years since this article was first flagged for not meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

contribs) 01:58, 30 July 2018 (UTC) Proposed Deletion.

Preceding unsigned comment added by D20Despot ( talk Still, I doubt this article is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia if only one non-fringe source has turned up in the nine years since this article was first written. 24.227.62.136 ( talk) 16:42, (UTC) I went through and removed un-sourced references to a venomous scorpion tail, references to the Congo Basin (the only cited source puts the creature in Kenya), toned down the language, removed physical and behavioral descriptions not present in the source, and removed reference to the Bengali novel "Chander Pahar" (the monster in the book, translated into English as bunyip, is not clearly intended to reference the dingonek). ? Greencircle ( talk) 09:28, 22 December 2009 (UTC) At least part of it appears to be a copyedit of the American Monsters article. If none can be found then the article probably would not be sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Newspaper articles discussing this belief or alleged sightings are among the most common references used to establish notability for articles about supposed crytids. I have not been able to find any so far in a web search. There are presently no references to non-fringe sources in this article to establish notability.