Enslaved robot boy

YoEnslaved robot boy (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your enlightened comments (but I doubt if the others will understand them)! --Brian Josephson (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Well, some will. For the article, what's important is what is in reliable sources. That's why experts often get into trouble on Wikipedia, because experts will write from what they know. Wikipedia is about what is verifiable, from reliable source. The trick here is to make sure that the article is held to what's in reliable sources, in both directions. There is a faction that will try to warp it toward the skeptical side, just as there are those editors who will want to cite and report from every breathless blog on this. Dr. Josephson, your role here could be to make sure, by giving us good advice on Talk, especially, that whatever is in the article doesn't contradict known physics, or that unproven theory is not used to claim that the Energy catalyzer is "impossible," unless that is an attributed statement, clearly the opinion of the person saying it, and not "established fact." --EnergyNeutral (talk) 00:06, 22 May 2011 (UTC)