h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: eye witness testimony and cryptozoology - A11758719
Author: Tabitca ,cat lover, a cuddly toy with attitude - U170714

This is part of something I have been working on as a private project,so any review comments would help with the other stuff I'm doing.

Hi!

This is also an interest of mine, so I've pounced.

Firstly, I like the entry a lot. You've got quite a lot of ground to cover and, as a basic summation of the issue, it's pretty good. I would like to have seen a little more on why eye witness reports are important to a cryptozoologist, and in fact a little more on cryptozoology itself. For example, you could have said that a cryptid is most often mentioned in local stories or folklore, or is reported by a local population and this is very often the jumping off point for an investigation. You could also mention a cryptozoological success story to illustrate the point.

Second, the nuts and bolts of style and format.
I don't know how comfortable you are with GuideML. If you've never approached it before, a good place to start would be A395552, a 'how to' page. This would help you set an easy-to-read format for the entry, although if you're really not happy about Guide ML at all this is something a Sub-Editor will fix.

You'll probably want to also take a look at capitalisation and spaces in the entry. For example, the title should be Eye Witness Testimony and Cryptozoology. I'm not going to nitpick spelling (for one, my own is usually hideous and for two there are folks in the PR forum with much better eyes for that than mine ).

I have been a hootooer for over 5 years and never got to grips with guideML.(possibly because i am dyslexic.)
Thank you for your suggestions,I'll mull them over.
As a fellow cryptozoologist I can recommend http://www.cryptomundo.com. for discussions with like minded people.

If you want to go the GuideML route and don't feel like taking a crash course, let me know.

I'd be happy to do the formatting if we can work out how to get it to you in a copy-and-pasteable format.

And thanks for the link! Good site.

thank you I'll see if I survive peer review first

GuideML isn't important. If you can't use it, then we can let a sub do it assuming that the entry s picked.

However, at the moment, it is a bit difficult to read. Mostly because of the spaces before and after the punctuation. When I have more time, I'll have another check through, but one thing I noted was somethere near the end there was an "I am sure have best interests at heart," and other 1st person references. h2g2 entries should factual, not personal opinion

The problem is I can't see what is wrong so I have to rely on other people to spot the mistakes. I've altered and added a few sentences. I don't want it to be too long,otherwise people will fall asleep before they get to the end

A fascinating subject that I hadn't given much thought to before. Well done!

It is a bit difficult to read, and I know you don't want to do the GML, but would you consider putting an extra line between paragraphs? It would help to break it up a bit and make it more accessible.

Some other observations:

Paranormal research involves anything seem as strange or different to everyday experience... >> missing something here.

The most well known study on eye witness testimony was by Loftus in 1979 >> Who, or what, was/is Loftus?

What the car blue or brown? >> Was

The first step would be to have the evidence recorded as soon as possible >> the evidence or the witness? Witness statement?

This would mean a pro forma would have to be readily available to complete. >> Perhaps a brief explanation of 'pro forma' for the less initiated. Witness statement?

However in the methods defence Brigham... >> However, in the method's defence, Brigham /or/ However, in defence of the method, Brigham...

I think to say that 'cryptozoology is not yet an accepted science' may be putting the case a little too strongly.

For example, many serious scientists would have liked the Loch Ness Monster to exist and therefore put forward serious proposals as to what kind of animal it could be.

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about cryptozoology:


"Heuvelmans [in his book] argued that cryptozoology should be undertaken with scientific rigor, but also with an open-minded, interdisciplinary approach. He also stressed that attention should be given to local and folkloric sources regarding such creatures. While often layered in unlikely and fantastic elements, folktales may indeed contain grains of truth and important information regarding these animals.

Some cryptozoologists align themselves with a more scientifically rigorous field like zoology, while others tend toward an anthropological slant or even a Fortean perspective. Cryptozoology is often considered a pseudoscience by mainstream zoologists and biologists".


I think you should make mention of a few other animals that fall into the realm of cryptozoology, e.g. the yeti.

There is also that newly discovered tribe who walk on all fours, the monkey that walks upright on tewo legs, ...

This is what I meant by 'new tribe' - a new species of human, 'the hobbit':

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/feature/story/0,13026,1388500,00.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4308751.stm

as one of those scientists who has had studied Loch ness for over 30 years I can tell you that cryptozoology is not accepted by mainstream science. people have lost their jobs because they said they believed in Loch ness phenomena , bigfoot etc.
thanks for the suggestions .i'll see what i can do

'...people have lost their jobs because they said they believed in Loch ness phenomena'

Well, I didn't mean to imply that they necessarily believed in the LNM, but that they're applying serious accepted scientific methods to debunking thephenomena. Surely this is still cryptozoology?

I refer you to this:
http://www.bigfootencounters.com/articles/cryptozoologists.htm
By admitting you want to look for cryptids ,you are automatically considered unsound. I am having trouble getting another academic job because it got out what i do in my spare time.

Hmm, well that's very sad.

I think, when I said above, that I thought it was a bit strong to say that cryptozoology wasn't considered respectable, I meant that there are people with scientific/biological degrees and other credentials who study it (as in the link you gave above). I hadn't realised that such people are actively ostracised by mainstream funding agencies etc. However, that does seem to be the way with science;' crackpot ideas often have a way of being the truth.

Your Guide Entry has just been picked from Peer Review by one of our Scouts, and is now heading off into the Editorial Process, which ends with publication in the Edited Guide. We've therefore moved this Review Conversation out of Peer Review and to the entry itself.

If you'd like to know what happens now, check out the page on 'What Happens after your Entry has been Recommended?' at EditedGuide-Process. We hope this explains everything.

Thanks for contributing to the Edited Guide!