Talk:Grey alien

Neutrality

I've added a POV tag to this article because I believe it takes a biased stance in two key areas:

1. Skeptical bias regarding the existence of Alien Greys: The article appears to lean heavily toward the assumption that Grey aliens do not exist, without adequately representing the perspectives of those who believe in their existence. While skepticism is important, Wikipedia's neutrality policy requires that all significant viewpoints be represented fairly and proportionally. The current tone and content seem dismissive of the possibility of their existence, which could alienate readers who hold differing views.

2. Assumption of mistreatment in abduction accounts: The article seems to take the position that alleged abductees are being mistreated by Greys, rather than considering alternative interpretations; for example, it does not explore the possibility that abductees' reactions could stem from instinctual fear responses to encountering something exotic or unknown, rather than actual harm or malice. This perspective should be included to provide a more balanced view of abduction narratives.

To address these issues and improve the article's neutrality, I suggest the following steps:

• Broaden representation of viewpoints: Include perspectives from believers and experiencers alongside skeptical views, ensuring that all significant opinions are covered proportionally.

• Neutralize tone: Revise language that appears dismissive or overly skeptical to maintain an encyclopedic tone.

• Expand discussion of abduction narratives: Add content exploring alternative interpretations of abductees' experiences, such as psychological or instinctual responses to unfamiliar stimuli.

• Cite diverse sources: Incorporate reliable sources from both skeptical and believer perspectives to ensure balanced coverage.

I welcome feedback and suggestions from other editors on how we can work together to address these concerns and improve the article's neutrality. Mesoutopia (talk) 00:12, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

In order of your numbered points:

1. Please read WP:YWAB. A bias in favor of skepticism with respect to a subject whose origins in popular culture are well-documented and known to be fictitious is entirely proper.

2. I have no idea how you might propose to fix this, considering that the article is neutrally conveying the narratives spun by those who claim to be abducted.

In order of your bulleted suggestions:

• That is explicitly against policy. See WP:FALSEBALANCE.
• Also a violation of our policy.
• Provide sources and we will do so. Without sources: we don't make shit up.
• There are no reliable sources for claims of fact from a believer's perspective. Sorry. That's just how it is.

Looking at your contributions, I see that you've made a number of changes to this article, many of which are not improvements (e.g. adding "allegedly" to a sentence which describes what a particular person believed. It is inapropriate for us to presume that he didn't actually believe what he told us he believed), so I need to review those now.

EDIT: I've just reviewed your changes. I don't see "alien grey" in the sourcing as a name for them, and it's an odd use of English word order, so I've removed it. You had already corrected the issue with your introduction of the word "allegedly", so I didn't do anything with that. Indeed, the current wording is a bit of an improvement. I also appreciate the way you reworded the introductory paragraph. It reads much better now. ᛗᛁᛟᛚᚾᛁᚱPants Tell me all about it. 19:34, 19 March 2025 (UTC)