• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Project: Fortean Categories & Articles On Wikipedia

F

forteanajones

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Apr 18, 2002
Messages
34
I assume I'm not the first, but I've decided to tackle all the various Fortean articles on Wikipedia.

Well, perhaps decide is a bit generous -- I got addicted to the platform and after making a few edits, moving things here and there, creating a new Fortean stub, and looking at category issues, before I knew it I have found myself entrenched in a fairly ambitious effort to bring all Fortean topics under the umbrella category of Forteana. Today, from a Fortean perspective, it's kind of all over the place.

So, before I continue down a cavalier path (or at least, before I proceed further without a plan) I decided to create a WikiProject. This is in sandbox, so you won't see it just yet, and I am seeking input on the following areas:

Scope
My personal vision is to designate the Forteana category I just created as a parent for Paranormal phenomena, Cryptozoology, Occult and Legendary creatures (may have missed others). Should I also propose qualitative changes to Fortean articles (e.g. style guide) at this juncture? Should any other considerations be built into the project right from the start?

Justification
Here is where I could use the most input, especially from the Fortean veterans. I'm sure it hardly needs to be said here that the Fortean perspective is focused on the bigger picture and almost rewrites the book on this kind of material. Yet parapsychology enthusiasts, conspiracy theorists, occult experts and perhaps especially skeptics may not see it quite the same way. Therefore the language of the project goals and justification needs to be just right.

Risks
Are folks here -- or might Forteans elsewhere be -- concerned about creating bad feelings on the Web by proposing these sorts of categorical changes?

Other
Any other perceptions, inspirations, suggestions, complaints...?

Incidentally, this also presents an opportunity to consider creating a Forteana article that is not imbedded in the existing article about Charles Fort -- today going to Forteana simply redirects you to Fort. (Some talented writing is needed there, however, and I would rather defer this honor to one of the Fortean Masters in this community).
 
forteanajones said:
Incidentally, this also presents an opportunity to consider creating a Forteana article that is not imbedded in the existing article about Charles Fort -- today going to Forteana simply redirects you to Fort. (Some talented writing is needed there, however, and I would rather defer this honor to one of the Fortean Masters in this community).
Click to expand...
A worthy goal. Fort and Forteana are not the same thing, after all. In fact, it's not clear whether Fort would share Marx's view of his followers - that he was Charles Fort, not a Fortean.

I don't think there is a particular risk of creating bad feeling with non-Forteans. I think there is more danger of creating bad feeling between Forteans. Different people have differing ideas about what is Fortean, and some may take offence if they don't feel their view is represented.

Not that I'm trying to talk you out of it. It's an admirable goal, and maybe the Fortpedia is worth another shot as well. Just be careful to maintain a balanced tone.
 
Forgive me if this has been posted before, but in case it hasn't here is a photo of Charles Fort, shortly before his death in 1932:

1683065471912.png
 
So, almost 20 years after the original post, where are we in this subject? I wouldn't place my hopes high on Wikipedia regarding anything that smells like "woowoo"; Wikipedia is in a very sorry state where cliques of people captured several subjects, zealously barring any changes to articles that are not in line with their agenda. Incidentally this is true for paranormal subjects, where organized skeptics edit articles according to what they consider proper (you can read the rants on Rupert Sheldrake's site if you want to know more).

Really, Wikipedia is lost for Fortean subjects. As we know, paraphrasing the American WarGames movie, the only winning move in rigged games is not to play them.

Edit: just take a look at this example:
https://www.wired.com/story/guerrilla-wikipedia-editors-who-combat-conspiracy-theories/
 
Good luck to anyone embarking on a taxonomy of Forteana! Wikipedia has been a celebrity lost-cause ever since it was instituted, nearly.

I'm doubtful if different hosting or editing will make much of a system out of anomalies. The best we can do is to keep on making connections and try to connect, if not resolve, issues of clashing cultural interpretations of phenomena. :dunno:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top