Talk:Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 18 September 2024 by reviewer Robert McClenon (talk · contribs).

Paranormal Low‑importance

	This article 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative Views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cryptozoology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cryptozoology, an attempt to improve coverage of the pseudoscience and subculture of cryptozoology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CryptozoologyWikipedia:WikiProject CryptozoologyTemplate:WikiProject CryptozoologyCryptids articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Folklore Low‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Space (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Space, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.SpaceWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceTemplate:WikiProject SpaceSpace articles

Notability

I have not reviewed the 111 (!) cited sources but my own WP:BEFORE search finds evidence of notability: [1], [2], [3] ~Kvng (talk) 22:32, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments left by AfC reviewers

Comment: @Robert McClenon: it looks like Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis was WP:PRODDED and then merged into Mac Tonnies as WP:ATD. I would classify this as a WP:BOLD move. I think you're right that the history at Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis needs to be retained to support attribution of the content now in Mac Tonnies#Cryptoterrestrial hypothesis. I believe the topic is notable (see Draft_talk:Cryptoterrestrial_hypothesis#Notability) and passes WP:CV and WP:NPOV tests so is ready to be accepted but I'm not sure what to do next. ~Kvng (talk) 22:36, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The sourcing problems still need to be fixed. BuySomeApples (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This draft is for a title that was previously an article, but was then cut down to a redirect. If this draft is accepted, the history should be preserved. Do not tag the redirect for G6.
Reviewers should check the history and verify whether there was a consensus to cut the article down to a redirect, or whether the action was taken boldly without discussion. If there was a consensus for the cutdown, do not accept this draft without verifying that the draft improves the article or that consensus has changed. If in doubt, please discuss.
Robert McClenon (talk) 07:28, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Remove the external links on prose throughout the article and also, some sections paragraphs in some sections are not sourced at all. Please cite your sources. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:08, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kvng - I didn't think it was important to check the references. The body of the article gives multiple examples of the hypothesis having been proposed at various times. I think that common sense is that the reports of authors having proposed the hypothesis are reliable. We aren't asking whether the hypothesis itself is reliable; reliable sources say that the hypothesis is pseudoscience. Anyway, there is more than a 50% chance that the article will survive AFD, if there is an AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Robert McClenon, I agree and was prepared to accept but I didn't know how to deal with the history merge issue you raised on 7 December. ~Kvng (talk) 02:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Kvng - First, I wasn't calling for a history merge, but the preservation of the history. That requires moving the redirect with history to somewhere that is associated with the article. Second, did you notice the name of this talk page? Third, I have accepted the draft, and have moved the history into draft space with a redirect to the article. You may examine and review the result. Any reviewer who wants to accept a draft when there is history in a redirect and isn't sure what needs to be done is welcome to ask me to do it for them. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:12, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]