Just what is this supposed to mean: "Paranormal advocates believe that ..." - could we have at least an unreliable source for this statement; and who are the "skeptics" referred to? - The article is set up as a battle-ground between extreme and unintelligible positions, rather than trying to just be informative - Anyway, the original planchettes were heart-shaped, and used only for automatic writing, with no association to the "ouija boards". Also, ideas about the operation of these instruments were never so unequivocal, between "believers" and "sceptics" as the writer of this article would assert. Another case of bad-tempered juveniles and science-groupies on WP trying to write articles about things of which they have no substantial knowledge.
- How do you know that the authors are bad-tempered juveniles and science-groupies? You don't cite any sources to back up that claim. Snark aside, you say that the original planchettes were heart-shaped, and used only for automatic writing, with no association to the "ouija boards" but you do not cite any sources for that claim either. Seems like you are adding the same sort of information that you call rubbish. My feeling is that this information from you and the other authors is better than nothing and that weak writing will improve over time when people who care take the time. If you don't want a weak article to become a battleground then don't throw the first stone. Add some value and move on. Cutelyaware (talk) 09:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)Reply
