Mars effect page on wikipediaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mars_effect
This page mentions some aspects of the controversy, containing some criticisms done to skeptics. But is very incomplete ; Suitbert Ertel, one of the main protagonist of mars effect controversy, is not even mentioned !
Michel Gauquelin page on wikipediaThe page does not exist, it redirects to the page about the Mars effect. Reducing a man to a small part of his work is not fair.
Suitbert Ertel page on wikipediaThe page does not exist ; Ertel is mentioned on a page about the name Ertel.
Dennis Rawlins page on en.wikipedia.orgen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dennis_Rawlins
The page briefly mentions his role in the mars effect story :
In 1976, as the only astronomer on the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry, he looked into the so-called Mars effect.with two references that expose skeptics' point of view : Cherfas, Jeremy (29 October 1981). "Paranormal-watchers fall out over the Mars effect". New Scientist Kurtz, Paul. Skepticism and Humanism: The New Paradigm The page contains two external links tnat permit to reach information independant of skeptics (a link to sTARBABY and a link to dioi.org/cot.htm, containing a list of Rawlins' contributions on astronomy and history of astronomy).
In this page, Rawlins mentions his wikipedia page :
From 2008 March to 2014 September, the Dennis Rawlins page on Wikipedia was trashed repeatedly by the sort of dirty-fighter censors which establishments traditionally use to discourage exposure of what they're ever-hiding. Threats — some repeatedly acted upon — against anyone associated with Rawlins, as well as a wide sampling of those Rawlins accomplishments persistently censored (despite zero evidence of innaccuracy) can be found at DIO 22  fn 109 [p.77]. A pre-ultravandalism 2008/10/2 Wiki-biography of DR can be recovered by clicking on archived; it includes for balance a DR-recommended list of articles attacking him, two of the articles having been written by himself! — to correct his 1/2-century career's only two serious prior mistakes). The current (since 2014) vastly-shrunken page (a stub lacking any mention of DR's central achievements regarding Neptune's discovery and ancient-astronomy) awaits stable restoration in a hypothetical future age, when scholars prefer answering views they disagree with, instead of burning them. For a hint of how healthy is such free-discourse at the moment, click on Call the Police! Source : dioi.org/cot.htmAs a wikipedia user, I would expect at least :
- a list of his scientific achievements,
- a summary of his implication in CSICOP (he was a co-founder and board member),
- a paragraph on his position in the mars effect controversy.
See also Is Rawlins serious ?