John Lear Censorship?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 17 2007 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Sure, it could be a coincidence. Probably is, in fact. It's just hard to find a source for that 1991 interview.




posted on May, 4 2007 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Just come across this thread so forgive me if this is old news; I just looked on google video and there are dozens of varied john lear vids on it.
The same on yahoo video as well.



posted on May, 24 2007 @ 03:14 PM
link   
There has been a video or two added to Google and You Tube lately. There are only three vids there at either site even though there are numerous links. The 1991 interview posted above I couldn't find at either site. I haven't checked Yahoo video yet.

[edit on 5/24/2007 by TheAvenger]



posted on Jun, 3 2007 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheAvenger
There has been a video or two added to Google and You Tube lately. There are only three vids there at either site even though there are numerous links.

Yeah, only 3 video interviews have been made so far as far as I know. All those new vids are just clips of the original three videos I think.


Originally posted by TheAvenger
The 1991 interview posted above I couldn't find at either site. I haven't checked Yahoo video yet.


If you ever find a full .wmv or an .avi version of any of the full video's, please post a download link... Thanks!



posted on Jun, 4 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   
Thanks for your reply. If I find a link to the full John Lear 1991 video, I will put it here.



[edit on 6/4/2007 by TheAvenger]



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 10:16 AM
link   
John Lear Censorship? What an ideal forum thread to write my message in…

Right now I am frustrated!

In November 2005 I wrote the John Lear article on Wikipedia. To my joy when typing in 'John Lear' in Google this article was pretty much the first page to show up.

Now I have just found out that Wikipedia have deleted the entire article! A couple of months ago I specially added a bibliography of sources that I used so that a deletion due to unsourced information would never occur…

Reasons for deletion

What they wrote about John Lear is an absolute disgrace! Close-minded, disrespectful and offensive!

“The sources given on the page are not what I would consider reliable, and I am unable to find reliable ones in my own search.”

Try harder then!

At least the article is still in the Google cache for anybody wishing to read it. Thank you to the other users who added to and updated the article over time.

Cheers and huge respect to John Lear!

[edit on 21-6-2007 by Strawberry_Icecream]



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
I missed! I did not even think to utube John. I have only enjoyed audio. Well John post some video here and see if it is the stuck up snobs at utube or if it is big bro. Weird and very unfortunate when they have to dissect truth at all costs.



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Strawberry_Icecream
John Lear Censorship?



Now I have just found out that Wikipedia have deleted the entire article! A couple of months ago I specially added a bibliography of sources that I used so that a deletion due to unsourced information would never occur…


What they wrote about John Lear is an absolute disgrace! Close-minded, disrespectful and offensive!


Cheers and huge respect to John Lear!

[edit on 21-6-2007 by Strawberry_Icecream]


What an outrage, I would be upset too. Change it back, and change it back every time they change it until they get tired of it. Whoever wrote that deletion message clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.




[edit on 6/21/2007 by TheAvenger]



posted on Jun, 21 2007 @ 06:16 PM
link   
Thanks for posting Strawberry_Icecream. I too find that annoying. If their only reason for deletion is because of unreferenced material, you should be able to provide references for all of John's FAA Certificates. He has them all and it is kind of a record in the sense that I believe he is the only one who has attained them all. Would that be a credible enough reference to keep an article online there?



posted on Jun, 22 2007 @ 05:53 AM
link   
Absolutely it would IronDogg! Thanks for the response guys. Yeah it's ridiculous that the article was removed ONLY because of people's prejudice against the subject matter (their 'reasons' are full of cheap jibes). It was not like the article was a poorly written stub. When I did try to cite references in the article they were removed as they were 'unreliable'.

How could a person unfamiliar with the UFO field determine that? Some of the videos/interviews that I referenced are obscure and hard to find so of course those Wikipedians are not going to find them by casually trawling Google.

The John Lear article had also been up for deletion once before. I of course removed the notice but then my IP address was blocked by Wikipedia without warning.

So the Bob Lazar article can stay, the George Knapp article can stay, but the John Lear article isn't allowed in? He was at the centre of the entire Area 51 story as you certainly all know! It does not make sense. Now the Ufology section has a huge hole in it.

By the way, the '1991' John Lear interview that you are all discussing on this thread is from 'UFOs & Area 51: Secrets of the Black World' by 2000 Film Productions. It was a 1995 German production directed by Michael Hesemann. It was actually one of my references for the article.

'UFOs & Area 51: Secrets of the Black World' is without doubt one of the best Area 51 documentaries ever made. Even Glenn Campbell agrees (read his review) even though he was the only Area 51 researcher who was not included in the documentary due a disagreement with Hesemann.



posted on Jul, 6 2007 @ 01:12 AM
link   
The John Lear Wikipedia article was removed for several valid reasons. You can read the exact details here.

Articles for deletion - John Lear

I only see one mildly offensive comment in that section.

The specific reasons were:

1. No verifiable sources were quoted. Remember, you can't use original research which is probably why earlier references were deleted.

2. Lear did not pass the notability test.

3. The article was proposed for deletion and a vote was held over a period of several days. The consensus was that the article should be deleted.

If you go around removing article deletion tags without following the proper procedure, then your IP will be blocked. Likewise, if you recreate the article your IP will also be blocked.

Your option is to ask for a deletion review.

Edited to add: The URL posting on this forum makes Wikipedia editing look easy!


[edit on 6-7-2007 by morpheus40]



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Thank you for the pretentious lecture on Wikipedia's rules and policy. You wouldn't be gloating about the John Lear article being deleted now would you?: www.abovetopsecret.com...

I am aware of Wikipedia's reasons for deletion. I linked to it earlier in the thread.

1. Verifiable sources were quoted. Earlier references were removed only because one user thought they were unreliable. There was no original research in the article. I added a bibliography of sources where the information could be found, but I guess the Wikipedians gave up when they couldn't verify them via their expert methods (i.e. Google searches).

2. Five people with no knowledge and contempt for the field determined that John Lear is not notable enough. Well at least you seem to think that John Lear is notable (or you wouldn't be writing posts on this forum).

3. The article was proposed for deletion by someone with no idea about the subject matter. Any user can plod along and place deletion tags on articles.

Don't worry, when the article is back up you can be one of the users who can delete it again.



posted on Jul, 8 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Trying again...

Link

Lex

Edit to add : Link works, now.

[edit on 8-7-2007 by Lexion]



posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Cheers for posting this link Lexion! I missed this when it was on: John Lear: Secrets Revealed

An entertaining show, and yet another source that verifies some of the information I compiled for the article.

Correction: On Pt.6 I'm not sure where Richard Hoagland got his information from on the Australian population. He states "13 million people, and most of them are Aborigines". Australia has a population of over 21 million (90% of European ancestry - the majority Anglo-Celtic). There are only 500,000 Indigenous Australians. Though the Australian outback has arguably been a testing ground for exotic beam weapons before, so why not something else?



posted on Jul, 11 2007 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strawberry_Icecream
I am aware of Wikipedia's reasons for deletion.


Clearly someone out there isn't aware of the Wikipedia policies because they have tried to recreate the John Lear article again without following the proper procedure.


2. Five people with no knowledge and contempt for the field determined that John Lear is not notable enough. .... The article was proposed for deletion by someone with no idea about the subject matter.


I'm interested to find out how you know the expertise of all the Wikipedia editors?


Well at least you seem to think that John Lear is notable (or you wouldn't be writing posts on this forum).


I think Lear is fascinating. As soon as someone can verify some of his claims, I'm sure he'll be on Wikipedia. Until then, anyone can make wild claims.



posted on Jul, 12 2007 @ 03:29 AM
link   
To my knowledge nobody has attempted to recreate the article. I certainly haven't. If someone has - good on them! Maybe it was one of the many people who contributed to the article over time.

Of course I don't know the expertise of all the Wikipedia editors. What I do know is the ones who voted for deletion obviously had prejudicial attitudes towards the subject matter. This can be clearly seen in the cheap shot comments they left such as 'complete nut', 'mentalist'... Even one of the people who voted to keep the article in used 'crankiness'… Real professionalism and objectivity displayed by Wikipedia here.

If you think John Lear is fascinating maybe you would like to help verify his claims instead of badgering us?



posted on Jul, 14 2007 @ 10:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Strawberry_Icecream
To my knowledge nobody has attempted to recreate the article.


Check the article log's.



If you think John Lear is fascinating maybe you would like to help verify his claims instead of badgering us?


I'd love to, but I'm too busy researching Howard Menger. He's much more interesting than Lear!

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jul, 18 2007 @ 02:35 PM
link   
oops!





[edit on 18/7/2007 by deaman88]



posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Hey strawberry I also wrote a complaint to wiki with much proven and factual references too both John and his very amazing career/life. William Lears own sites and books confirm much of Johns actual aviation accomplishments. Sadly Our Deny at all cost bretheren cant discern between Johns views and theories and Johns proven and quite impressive aviation carreer. For gosh sakes the guy is The son of the patriarc founder of Lear aircraft and that alone warrants a Wiki IMO.
I hate how sour grapes folks resort to slander and ultimately try changing or deleting factually proven info and ultimately considering anyone thinking along Johns line of thought as a"blind follower". Please.
To John thanks for your patience as well as fortitude to buck the powers that be. However they are always gonna be watching you and trying these tactics at every occassion. Thats why myself as well as many others who do know of John Lear the aviator step up when these facts are being scewd. Whether one believes in your theories or not is No reason to try and soil your proven accomplishments.
Thanks again John.

[edit on 19-7-2007 by VType]



posted on Jul, 20 2007 @ 10:36 AM
link   
Vtype - Well said! Whereabouts did you submit your complaint on Wikipedia? Are you expecting a reply at all? I guess that one of the comments on the discussion page is from you too (with a link to The Lear Gene article). With poor attitudes of some of the editors it seems that we are up against it!

I really need to sit down and go through The Lear Gene article properly and add some more information to the deleted article (or maybe you can do it if you wish)...

John Lear himself probably has numerous articles from magazines, aviation journals, newspaper clippings about his own records and achievements (not to mention all those certificates). I wonder if John would ever post some of them here? Would be great to see them and a huge slap in the face to those Wikipedian troublemakers...

Horrificus - Yeah I saw those 'Entire post removed by staff' messages and wondered what went on! It's the first time I've seen entire posts banned like that before.

[edit on 20-7-2007 by Strawberry_Icecream]





 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join