This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Phoenix Lights article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article.
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Arizona, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Arizona on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArizonaWikipedia:WikiProject ArizonaTemplate:WikiProject ArizonaArizona
Phoenix Lights is within the scope of WikiProject Nevada, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the U.S. state of Nevada. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.NevadaWikipedia:WikiProject NevadaTemplate:WikiProject NevadaNevada
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory, conspiracy theories, and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Wikipedia states all these phoenix lights were "military aircraft" flying in formation and/or " flares", as if this is the indisputable truth. This view is also word for word the unashamed lies from officialdom about the incident- a position which has since been descredited by the original proponents themselves (Phoenix Mayor at the time, independent pilots, airmen,etc) under FOI recent disclosures. That the view is (as time of writing) still on this page, sadly puts the credibility of this platform as a reliable source of unbaised kmowledge in doubt. For crying out loud, how can flares/known aircraft remain near stationary in the air, or fly in inch-pefect formation for over 3 hours and 300 miles, and without making even a whisper of sound. Genuine science alone tells you that is an impossibility, if you may still discount the multitudes of videos and witness reports at hand. I do believe I am not alone in feeling this is an uncharacteristic (so far as i thinK) laxity of standards, hopefully the article can be recast to change the view. Joseph S. Mawejje (talk) 23:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
How you, I, or any other editors "feel" about a topic is irrelevant. What matters for Wikipedia articles is, per WP:RS, reliable, independent, secondary sources. If you have any such sources to support your desired content (really, read WP:RS), then it can be included in the article. If not, then you are in the wrong shop. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 02:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Again NPOV forgetting common sense and covering proved lies of military. Sightings were mute, no sound, no motor planes.Shame 88.4.18.39 (talk) 20:37, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
I completely agree about this platform publishing false news and cover ups, calling it legit. This isn't the first b.s article I've come across.
Opening Wikipedia just now, I was confronted with the 'needing a $2 donation'. You can be sure I'm not encouraging false media!!
If you're not receiving FACTS from either side, and you're unable to research the topic APPROPRIATELY yourself,then maybe stay quiet about a matter, instead of 'going along' with what you're told. C'mon, you know it looks ridiculous. We all know this is b.s. And,it just looks REALLY BAD for you. (Unless of course, you're a willing participant of the corrupt scaffolds that are collapsing)
Do better,or this platform will quickly become irrelevant. ~2025-33326-14 (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
There's a myth going around that Wikipedia has some huge ax to grind against the UFO community, but it's not so. Did you ever have a group project with strangers? Writing an entire encyclopedia, by committee, is a lot harder than it looks, and every article is just a summation of what mainstream sources are saying, not what wiki editors personally believe. On any topic, only use the wiki article as a starting point, check out the references and think for yourself. Wikipedia is not a gospel, our text is not the "gospel truth". If you find the "mainstream explanation" absurd, don't blame Wikipedia: we didn't write it, we don't necessarily endorse it! We report on the the UFOs supposedly caused by Swamp Gas, and that's an extremely absurd explanation. Feoffer (talk) 06:07, 15 November 2025 (UTC)
