2025 RationalWiki 'Oregon Plan' Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!
Donations so far: $7608.77Goal: $10000

Talk:Blobsquatch

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

is this really necessary? AMassiveGay (talk) 23:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I like to think so. It's a popular neologism and gives some important history. It has an interesting history in that it's actually a term that originated first among cryptozoologists but has become popular in skeptical circles. --Mindme (talk) 00:24, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

does it need a whole article, or accurately a stub? i dont think so. its more suited to a glossary AMassiveGay (talk) 00:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

xkcd for Jan 25, 2022 seems very appropriate to this article... [1] — Unsigned, by: Kencolt / talk / contribs

That's a good one. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 02:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Added to external links. Thanks! --Mindme (talk) 15:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
And another one, same source, also new, and... heh. [2] Kencolt (talk) 23:35, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
not seeing anything that warrants this being an article or anything that would make this more than a stub. its neologism thats means a fuzzy picture. theres nothing more to it than that. AMassiveGay (talk) 23:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
there is no scope for it to be anymore than a stub AMassiveGay (talk) 23:47, 27 January 2022 (UTC)