This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Paranormal This redirect falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.ParanormalWikipedia:WikiProject ParanormalTemplate:WikiProject Paranormalparanormal

I really don't know what is going on with the edits here. This edit [1] removes my wikify notice and actually de-wikifies the entry turning it into a real mess. There are a series of reverts going on here and we are getting to the point of WP:3RR. If there are copyright violations please point me to the site and if there are issues then remove the offending text don't just drop something else in. (Emperor 12:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Emperor, while your editorial efforts are appreciated, you rv the article to an older version which immediately brought up advertising and copyright flags which the current version did, and does, not. See the organization's website perhaps. More information on Charles Fort does need to be added along with material on Tiffany Thayer and the Fortean Society. The current version, while brief, is referenced. Since you list yourself as being connected to the UnCon and the FT's website perhaps an inadvertant non NPOV is in play here and your revert edit looks like a rvv. SageMab 15:44, 23 July 2007 (UTC)SageMab[reply]

My efforts are purely to improve this entries (and other Fortean ones) - I can assure you there is no NPOV issue here (in fact I am unsure if I am being accused of being biased for or against INFO with my edits) - my main concern is that this entry kept being put back to a version that was only unwikifying it but also making a real mess of it. So my concerns are largely on the formatting front. If there is content you object to then remove it and work within the current article rather than dropping some other badly formatted version in. This entry needs wikifying, it also needs editting to be more neutral. If you are concerned about my edits then I can ask someone from the Paranormal Project to take a look over things and give a second opinion. (Emperor 16:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks Emperor your points are well taken. You were not being accused of anything but in your edit you had added material from the organizations' website which could be misconstrued as advertising or maybe a copyright violation of their site. Since you are from a sister/brother organization to INFO you might be thought of as not having NPOV but, if it is, it is not meant to be not a non NPOV by you as I do not question your good intentions. Your editing efforts are appreciated. The article still needs links to Heinlein, Robert Anton Wilson, Philip K. DIck, Keel, Thayer, Fortean Society, Fate. ````SageMab

I'm afraid you give me too much credit - I don't know what the relationship is between FT and INFO and I don't really know enough about INFO to contribute much more than general advice on structure, formatting, etc. I've done a bit of formatting and added some links. My main suggestion would be to try and trim down some of the details (I don't think we need to know about all their changes of address for example) and there are a lot of statements made which will need sourcing to satisfy verifiability. Note also that notability also needs to be addressed using independent reliable sources. I'd rather this was addressed now as it is probable passing editors might flag this and that gets to be a bit of a pain (and can leave the entry open to being put up for deletion, which would be a shame). I'll keep an eye open for possible sources. (Emperor 02:06, 24 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Read the sources listed for a start in understanding why this organization is important in the history of Forteana. The International Fortean Organization rescued, revived is the term often used, the original Fortean Society from oblivion. The organization was instrumental in popularizing "The Complete Works of Charles Fort" which had, largely fallen into obscurity after the publication of the 1941 omnibus edition by Henry Holt and Company. Damon Knight recognized the important contribution the International Fortean Organization was making to a host of science fiction wirters, especially Americans, and asked to write the new introduction. While details of the magazine's influence can be read in the back issues written by notable forteans such as David Drake, Michael T. Shoemaker, Phyllis Benjamin, Bernard Heuvelmans books by modern Fortean authors such as Colin Wilson plainly state the organization's influence on their thought process. Check out the source below for both David Drake and Colin Wilson; the article specfically notes the influence of the FortFest on their professional work. Many significant Fortean authors have been long-time contributing members and research collaborators with fellow members of the organization. INFO popularized Forteana and Fortean conferences as a platform for new ideas in the States although in a different way than the Fortean Times did in Britain. It holds an important place in the history of Forteana (query some of their prominent speakers such as John Michell) so I question your edit of a repeat delete of the last paragraph since you are directly connected to the Fortean Times and their UnCon, your repeated insertion in previous edits from what you must know to be the organizations' copyrighted website, and your POV when you speak of deletion by Wikipedia which sounds like a not so veiled threat. ````SageMab

I see you are questioning my neutrality again (although this time I appear to be being accussed of being anti-INFO). This: "The International Fortean Organization (INFO) holds a solid niche in the annals of forteana." is not itself NPOV which is why I removed it. I stand by that (I'd certainly recommend its removal from the FT entry unless it was a quote that could be well sourced and it fitted in) - equally I am not prepared to make an issue of it. I am also issuing no veiled threats - it is a statement of fact. I do a lot of work on entries to try and stop them falling into getting caught in the WP:N trap (as I've seen the policy remove far too many entries) and while I know this is notable enough to deserve and entry what I know and what can be proved are two different things. What you have added should be fine to ensure it stays, so thanks for that. I would recommend using WP:FN if you can to source any specific statements as it makes a long reference list easier to use. I'll end by saying you should try and assume good faith. (Emperor 23:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

No offense intended but since you are part of a sister/brother organisation, the Fortean Times', and work with the FT's UnCon that it might be hard not to have a bias. You are certainly not being accused of being anti-INFO and there was no intension of making you feel maligned. I do appreciate your efforts, truly. I just want to make a point that the International Fortean Organization, which Keel calls "the sucessor to the Fortean Society "is a significant part of the history of Forteana and is a proven fact. That is why I respectfully disagree with your multiple deletions of "The International Fortean Organization holds a solid niche in the annals of forteana." Please do speak to RJM Rickard about it as both the FT and INFO developed in tandem. INFO did inherit almost all of the original material of the Fortean Society and continued on in the same manner. I do think that the longer article should replace the shorter one and, since INFO is based in the States, that it should be spelled "Organization" the way the organization has always spelt it and not "Organisation" as it is from your original entry in 2004. Your help is always appreciated and I know we will both cultivate NPOV.SageMab 01:25, 25 July 2007 (UTC)SageMab[reply]

Thing is I agree with the statement (it is an important part of the continuation of Fort's legacy and has an important position in the whole area) but such statements need to be proved. The problem is what we know doesn't really count it is about what we can prove - the ideal situation would be if you could find a quote from someone notable saying something like that and if so I'd recommend moving it to the lead. As I say I'm not going to leave it but don't be suprised if someone else picks up on it at some point - it would be best to address the issue now rather than later. However, that is just my advice you can take it or leave it.

For the record I don't have anything to do with UnCon (I've only ever been once) but have written for Fortean Times (and helped out on the website) so felt it important to declare this.

Oh and you'll need to vote on the merge in the other entry as it is the destination - it is fairly uncontroversial (if I'd thought about it all those years ago I'd have got it moved to the right location - I'm afraid I'd forgotten I'd even started it ;) ) but needs to be left open for a bit in case I've overlooked anything. (Emperor 02:07, 25 July 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Your suggestions are well taken, thanks. I do have extra material to add, including quotes and footnotes but have been busy with other projects. I think some of the sources can also be moved to Footnotes. I do agree with your last thoughtful comments. Agreed that the article should be merged with the International Fortean Organization. As the articles are essentially the same, can the longer article (International Fortean Organisation with an s) just replace the shorter one so it does not just look like a blanked page or a rv or a rvv?.SageMab 00:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)SageMab[reply]

Why is it appropriate to include postal addresses in this article? Why is it appropriate to list all these people? Reads like name-dropping. In fact the whole article appears to be written as an ad for this organisation. Yes I'm sure someone can claim every sentence is a "fact", but just being true doesn't make it NPOV - a POV can be pushed by choosing some "facts" and not others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.29.253 (talk) 21:28, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. Your comment could be applied to most of the Wiki articles about organizations. Names listed is what this non-profit educational organisation is about. I see you were not brave enough to sign your name to your post. Sounds like you have a grudge against this organisation.

Well we have to assume good faith. On the specific points I don't see a big problem with the address they need only look on the website for it (although there might be a policy on this - there is one on everything after all!!). The names seem fine - I find such information very useful as it helps you assess things based on the people speaking (how important they are and the fields they cover). My only niggle would be it is a big long list of names, which doesn't make for good reading, and it might be worth reformatting it as an actual list under a new section and that way you can add in extra information on what their talks were about which would make it even more useful. (Emperor 12:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Yes indeed we do. Your niggle is well taken. If you look at the entry for the Weird Weekend there is also a long list of names of past, current and future speakers which I have no problem with. It is great to see what has gone on in the past and what is going on today, especially with a conference. The International Fortean Organisation has been doing conferences of this kind for so long (longest, I believe) every year (I notice even one the year of 9-11) that the list of speakers would be huge and would include most of the notable names in the field such as John Keel, Bob Rickard and John Michell. FortFest's speakers are so well known that most, except for John Anthony West who needs one, have an entry on Wiki. This creates a "sea of blue" that cannot be avoided. This article has consenus, is of appropriate length, and I would rate it a good article.209.163.119.196 16:17, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]