EntertainmentResources

HEY

Sorry, I missed the last few edits you made to this page. Something's screwy with the formatting, I guess. I'll see what I can do, although I can't promise you'll get your wishes granted. A similar case happened at the Carol Yager page; you might want to browse through the discussions there. What you're proposing basically requires that we change official policy at Wikipedia, and I don't see that happening anytime soon.

I have to go right now, and I'll probably be busy with schoolwork until the weekend. When I have more time, I'll try to craft a longer response. Thanks for your patience, Zagalejo 23:02, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Since this page is kind of messed up right now (I think it has something to do with the reference tags in you draft of the article), why don't you leave all of your messages up here? Click on the little [edit] prompt to the right of the word HEY; that should do the trick.

It's good that you've found some tv references, as that helps establish further notability. Could you possibly provide more exact air-dates? The thing I'm most worried about is the discussion of OSIR, as there is little evidence available online to prove they were as expansive and influential as the article suggests. All we have are weird sites like this, which are never going to satisfy Wikipedia standards. Indeed, a lot of people think OSIR is a hoax, although it seems clear from a Lexis-Nexis search that they did exist in some form during the early 1990s. Anyway, everything the article mentions about OSIR has to be carefully referenced by a good source that is independant of Chacon. Otherwise, people are going to have good reason to question the facts of the article.

Now, all of the facts in the article may indeed be true, but with all due respect, you're just a voice on the internet. If I wanted to, I could say that my draft of the article was approved by Chacon's legal representation. Of course it's not, but the point is, I have absolutley no way of knowing that what you say is true. I'm sorry if I'm being blunt; I just want you to understand why I'm so concerned here.

Don't take this personally, but I'm going to revert back to my bare-bones version of the article for the time being. I'm sure you're getting annoyed about that, but I'm worried someone might speedily delete the article as it stands now. Is there anything blantantly incorrect in my version of the article? I tried to fix the line about Chacon being the sole director of OSIR; anything else I could do?

Tell you what. You can experiment with your version of the article here. Why don't you look at WP:Citing sources to learn how to properly format your references? Each ref should look something like this: <ref>Bibliographical information</ref>. Then, somewhere at the bottom of the page, include a little message like this: <references/> You only have to do that last part once. Try it yourself, and if you have problems, let me know.

Thanks again for your patience. Zagalejo 19:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

ANOTHER VERSION

Hi and thanks again for all your help with this article. I am still shocked that anyone would still be questioning the existence of O.S.I.R. in light of the fact that they were featured on such national network broadcasts as NBC News, National Geographic and Unsolved Mysteries. But that again is something I suppose is out of my hands. I wasn't sure whether you were able to read my latest version of the article, so I am inserting it below. It's basically still the same, but has significantly more references, as well as notes at the bottom of the article referring to broadcast shows. If you have a chance to read the following article, is there anyway you can "copy and paste" another version but UNDERLINE or BOLD the specific sentences that are not acceptable. For example, in your existing article, you reference Chacon as part of the O.S.I.R....in my article, I do the same, but am simply more specific about his position and involvement. I don't quite understand why your version is acceptable and mine is not. Your UNDERLINED/BOLD version can help me draft an article that is perhaps vague enough not to cause anyone to delete it. I look forward to getting your response. Here is the article:

Give me a week or so to comb through the article and add a running commentary. Please don't take my reversion of the article as belittling your contributions. My version is only "better" in that I understand what kinds of sources will satisfy the deletionists.

The situation with OSIR still seems very strange to me. If it is "the only legitimate scientific organization in the world that scientifically investigates and researches ... thousands of cases of every type of phenomena imaginable," I would expect them to have left much more enduring impact than a few television appearances. Groups like CUFOS, CSICOP, and the ISC are easily verifiable, and the results of their work have made it into hundereds of books and journals. But OSIR? As far as I can tell, their supposedly volumnious research hasn't made a dent in the body of paranormal literature. There's nothing said about them in Jerome Clark's Unexplained!, which is probably the best overview of paranormal phenomena currently available. Indeed, The Very Scary Almanac is the only book I've seen that mentions them. I'm starting to suspect they were just created to take on a few token investigations as build-up for the tv series Psi-Factor. Of course, I may be totally wrong here. If you can point to some more books/journals that mention them and their research, then let me know. Did they publish any papers, etc? I'm curious... Zagalejo 09:55, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I feel we should focus more on the "Chacon article" rather than O.S.I.R.. But to address your questions about their "media exposure", based on a recorded "Halloween" lecture I heard that took place at the Queen Mary in Long Beach, the O.S.I.R.'s Public Affairs department stayed clear of doing any interviews with newspapers and printed publications because of the lack of "final creative control" of articles. I think one of the last two printed articles referencing them was in the "Very Scary Almanac" and the "Writers Guild of America" article primarily about Chacon but referencing his work with O.S.I.R.. For this reason, "printed" articles will be extremely scarce. The groups you mentioned (CUFOS, CSICOP and ISC) are mostly not-for-profit groups that are and fucntion along with the current academic process of sharing scientific discovery. O.S.I.R. was a "private organization" (i.e. Rand Corporation, SAIC, Halliburton, etc.) that had it's own private directive for developing scientific applications. Therefore, they have no need to publish their works, no need to share information or interact with the scientific community. I was able to confirm over a year ago the existence of the group from 1990-2000 at the California State Department as a corporation, as well as with Dunn & Bradd Street. "ALL" of the TV news stories and interviews (NBC, FOX, ABC Network News, Eye to Eye with Connie Chung, National Geographic Explorer, Ton Snyder Show, etc.) were done and broadcast long before there was a TV series "PSI Factor". In addition, I highly doubt that major news organizations like "NBC Network News" would do a bogus feature news article on a group that doesn't exist. Furthermore, in my research, I discovered that in order for the distributors of the "PSI Factor" series (CBS-Eyemark and Atlantis/Alliance) to make a claim at the beginning of the series which specifically states the show is "Inspired by a Real Organization named, O.S.I.R.", they must adhere to E&O (Errors and Omissions) and FCC (Federal Communications Commission) requirements for insurances and fraud purposes. Also, there are countless books that have been published that do not reference other major groups, like the S.S.E. (Society for Scientific Exploration) and the P.A. (Parapsychological Association), but yet these two groups are seen as the most preimenent public organizations that also academically explore paranormal phenomena. Eric Elfman (Very Scary Almanac) told me himself how amazed and impressed he was ewith the O.S.I.R., as well as Chacon, and did his share of research about the group before publishing and was not suprised on how other authors have never heard of the group. So in closing about O.S.I.R., all these "physical facts" have myself and many others in shock that anyone would NOT believe in their existance...it really isn't that amazing a thing to accept the existance of this private group. There are far more amazing things people claim (i.e. Area 51) that have absolutely NO SOLID EVIDENCE of public existance that have been accepted. Have you read the article on "Men in Black"??? Aside now from the O.S.I.R. issue, lets focus on "Chacon" and please respond back with "your version of my article" to show what can remain publishable. THANK YOU AGAIN!

But the OSIR issue is not separate from the Chacon article. The article's claims of "countless international expeditions and explorations" need to be sourced. With a Lexis-Nexis newspaper and news transcript search, I find evidence that they investigated a few hauntings in California and Louisiana. That's it. I'm not sure what they were shown doing in the other television segments; could you possibly provide more details?

I'll have my commentary on your proposed version of the article as soon as possible. Just to remind you: I am first and foremost a student, so I have lots of "real homework" on my plate, as well. I do appreciate your patience through all this, and I hope you're starting to understand some of my concerns. Zagalejo 00:16, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

STREAMLINED ARTICLE

I took my article and streamlined it immensely to try and avoid any further disputes. Additionally, I obtained an E-mail address for Chacon through Eric Elfman and E-mailed Chacon this new streamlined article, although I have not yet heard back. Here is the streamlined article, as well as the reference notes to it...Let me know whether this might be finally acceptable:

Christopher Chacon is considered one of the world's experts and authorities on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is an acclaimed writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist, having begun his career in entertainment as a master illusionist/magician.

From 1983 to 1989, Chacon partnered with parapsychologist Loyd Auerbach in conducting research/investigations involving parapsychological phenomena. In 1989, Chacon was recruited by the Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.) as a field operative. Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena. While with O.S.I.R., Chacon was also a member of The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, The New York Academy of Sciences, The Society for Scientific Exploration and The Center for Science Education.

Among the film, stage-theatrical and TV productions he has created, includes the dramatic-adventure TV series, "PSI Factor: Chronicles of the Paranormal", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer. As writer, creator/executive producer and director of this TV series, Chacon produced 88 episodes that are currently seen in over 30 countries.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]

ADDITIONAL SOURCES ➢ TV- “NBC Network News”. October 1992. ➢ TV- “Hard Copy”. November 1992. ➢ Publication- “Who ya Gonna Call”. The Journal (Writers Guild of America Publication). February 1993. ➢ Publication- "Spook Stalker". People. 20 September 1993. p. 85 ➢ TV- “Fox Network News”. May 1993. ➢ TV- “National Geographic Explorer: Ghosts of the Bayou”. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Unsolved Mysteries”. (Multiple Episodes) 1991. 1992. 1993. ➢ Radio- “Mark & Brian Radio Show”. (Multiple Broadcasts) October 1993. May 1994. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Sightings”. (Multiple Episodes) PILOT EPISODE, October 1991, October 1994, November 13 1994, November 27 1994. ➢ Radio- “KABC Morning Show”. October 1991. ➢ TV- “The Other Side”. 1995. ➢ TV- “Home Show”. (Multiple Episodes) October 1991. October 1993. ➢ TV- “Bertice Berry Show”. November 1993. ➢ TV- “Eye to Eye with Connie Chung”. October 1993. ➢ TV- KCAL “Live in LA”. October 1993. ➢ TV- “MSNBC Presents the Tom Snyder Show”. ➢ Book- “Very Scary Almanac” by Eric Elfman. Published 1993.

It's getting better; thanks so much for your cooperation and civility throughout all of this.

I got rid of the <ref> tags altogether, since they seem to be the source of the problems on this page. Anyway, a few points. I'll go through this line by line:

• Christopher Chacon is considered one of the world's experts and authorities on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. This begs the question: considered by whom? I'd rewrite the sentence as "Christopher Chacon is a prominent authority on paranormal and supernatural phenomenon... etc," or something like that.
• In addition, he is an acclaimed writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist, having begun his career in entertainment as a master illusionist/magician. Similarly, acclaimed by whom? Has he won any specific awards for his work?
• From 1983 to 1989, Chacon partnered with parapsychologist Loyd Auerbach in conducting research/investigations involving parapsychological phenomena. My version of the article mentions how Chacon and Auerbach co-founded the Office of Paranormal Investigations - and this was actually backed up by a newspaper referencve. Could that be added?
• In 1989, Chacon was recruited by the Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.) as a field operative. I guess this is ok. I'm still uneasy about the OSIR stuff, but this sentence doesn't make any extraordinary claims, so we can leave it as is.
• Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena. Considering how difficult it is to find reliable information about OSIR, I think this should be toned down a bit. I'm going to break this one down into two parts:
  • Chacon has traveled the world... My newspaper sources only have him visiting sites in the US, but I'll let this slide, since it's definitely conceivable that he has done some research overseas.
  • ..investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena. This is the sort of claim that needs careful referencing. With Lexis-Nexis, I can confirm that he has investigated reports of poltergeist activity, out-of-body experiences, extra-sensory perception, and psychokinesis. Perhaps he was shown researching the other types phenomena (ie UFOs, strange creatures, possessions, miracles, etc) on his television appearances, but I don't know. Do you happen to have more details about the TV sources? The "thousands" claim also needs a source. If it can't be referenced by a third-party, then we should be more vague (eg, "many").
• While with O.S.I.R., Chacon was also a member of The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, The New York Academy of Sciences, The Society for Scientific Exploration and The Center for Science Education. This sounds like something that can be verified (by sources independent of Chacon, that is). Do any of these organizations have complete lists of members available?
• Among the film, stage-theatrical and TV productions he has created, includes the dramatic-adventure TV series, "PSI Factor: Chronicles of the Paranormal", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer. As writer, creator/executive producer and director of this TV series, Chacon produced 88 episodes that are currently seen in over 30 countries. What has he produced/directed/created besides PsiFactor?

I hope my comments are clear. If you have any questions, let me know. Thanks again for your patience and civility through all of this. Zagalejo 22:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

OK....I feel we are getting close! I took your recommendations and further referenced my research and came up with the following. First appearing below is the revised article, followed by my explanation and responses to your previous notes.

Christopher Chacon is considered a prominent authority on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is a writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist, having begun his career in entertainment as a master illusionist/magician.

From 1983 to 1989, Chacon partnered with parapsychologist Loyd Auerbach in conducting research/investigations involving parapsychological phenomena. In 1989, Chacon was recruited by the Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.) as a field operative. Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena. While with O.S.I.R., Chacon was also a member of The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, The New York Academy of Sciences, The Society for Scientific Exploration and The Center for Science Education.

In entertainment, Chacon most notable creation is the dramatic-adventure TV series, "PSI Factor: Chronicles of the Paranormal", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer. As writer, creator/executive producer and director of this TV series, Chacon produced 88 episodes that are currently seen in over 30 countries.

➢ I changed, “ one of the world's experts and authorities” to “prominent authority” ➢ I completely removed the word “acclaimed” ➢ I did not add your version because of conflicting information I found regarding Chacon’s involvement with The Office of Paranormal Investigations. Additionally, the newspaper articles you referenced were in error according to both Chacon and Auerbach. For these reasons, my version plays it safer regarding their work together. If this is going to be a sticking point, I would then prefer the entire reference to Auerbach and The Office of Paranormal Investigations to be deleted. ➢ In regards to: Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena. I am referencing the article published in “The Journal” (the official journal/magazine of the Writers Guild of America). It not only references the many types of phenomena he has investigated, but also confirms he “travels the world” conducting his research/investigations. Here is the reference link info: [9] ➢ In regards to Chacon’s membership in the groups stated, I have seen these references in a variety of sources, including www.IMDB.com. I was unsuccessful in confirming the information with any of these groups due to their limited archival past records, as well as their need to keep member records confidential. If you still feel that these membership sources are an issue, feel free to delete them and lose the sentence. ➢ I changed: “Among the film, stage-theatrical and TV productions” to “In entertainment, Chacon’s most notable creation is”

IMDB is fine for Writers Guild of America credits, but everything else is user-generated. I wouldn't be comfortable using IMDB as a source for Chacon's group affiliations. I'll check the groups myself to see if they have any records. As for the Office of Paranormal Investigations, do you know what specifically the newspapers got wrong?Zagalejo 16:27, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, it looks like anyone can join The New York Academy of Sciences , The American Association for the Advancement of Science, the Federation of American Scientists, or the Society for Scientific Exploration if they shell out the membership dues. Even if Chacon did belong to these groups, it wouldn't be worth mentioning in the article. I'm not sure what the situation is with The Center for Science Education, since there seem to be several groups with that title.

To be frank, all of the above gives me some concerns. Chacon's resume is starting to look less impressive than it actually is, and my suspicions about his involvement with OSIR remain. Zagalejo 16:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

FURTHER STREAMLINED

TO BEGIN WITH...I just received back a response from my E-mail to Chacon and while he preferred his legal representation to handle "interview questions of this type" he was willing to confirm that "MY" existing article is accurate and acceptable and the current one was in error. I continue to be a little baffled by the concern here, but if you feel we must explore this, then lets... Firstly, I referenced the "WGA Journal" which is the official publication of the Writers Guild of America and should be acceptable as a source over and above IMDB since it is a publication. Secondly, while "anyone" might be able to join these groups, some of the most prestigious scientists in the world belong to them and therefore have as much credence as someone who belongs to the American Medical Association. Thirdly, I have no idea where you come up with the conclusion that "Chacon's resume is starting to look less impressive"??? He has "NO" resume online and we are only referencing whatever information we are getting from other sources and now directly from him. How you conclude that Chacon is "less impressive" simply based on the lack of reference is beyond me! Especially in light of his many appearances on so many hugely rated TV programs (National Geographic Explorer, NBC Network News, Unsolved Mysteries, etc.). Lastly, in regards to the "Office of Paranormal Investigations", contrary to whatever inaccurate news articles might state, Chacon himself stated that he worked with Auerbach from 1983 to 1989 and was then recruited by OSIR. It was in 1989 that the "Office of Paranormal Investigations" was formed and therefore he couldn't have been working with Auerbach.

I am revising the article AGAIN, and "deleting" all references about the groups he is associated with, as well as his involvement with Auerbach and the Office of Paranormal Investigations. Hopefully this will be acceptable. Finally, if you would prefer to directly communicate with Chacon to rectify this matter, perhaps you should also E-mail him... The lastest revised article is below:

Christopher Chacon is considered a prominent authority on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is a writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist, having begun his career in entertainment as a master illusionist/magician.

A former field operative of The Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.), Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena.

In entertainment, Chacon’s most notable creation is the dramatic-adventure TV series, "PSI Factor: Chronicles of the Paranormal", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer. As writer, creator/executive producer and director of this TV series, Chacon produced 88 episodes that are currently seen in over 30 countries.

The American Medical Association at least has eligibility standards. Those groups mentioned in the Chacon article don't make Chacon any more notable than someone who has subscribed to Sports Illustrated. Indeed, it bothers me that his publicist or whoever would even mention those groups in his biographies. That information, though not necessarily inaccurate, is totally misleading. It's the same sort of tactic I've seen from cranks and creation scientists: trot out a bunch of credentials that sound impressive to fool people who don't know better. Maybe you think I'm paranoid, but this sort of thing is by no means unprecedented. (For the record, I wasn't really using "resume" in a literal sense. Perhaps it was a poor word choice.)

The crux of the matter remains the insufficiently verifiable claim that Chacon has investigated "thousands of reports of every type of phenomena." I'm glad that you found the WGA article, but it still doesn't convince me. It just repeats the same extraordinary claims that are reported elsewhere. In light of the problems verifying information about OSIR, I'd put more faith in sources that actually recorded Chacon in the act of doing research. Honestly, it still bugs the hell out of me that someone who has supposedly done as much as Chacon would have left so little enduring evidence of his accomplishments. There should be something more than a few television appearances, don't you think? If the great bulk of his research is not available to the public, then it is not verifiable, and that makes writing a Wikipedia article problematic.

....You know what? I can't in good conscience support this article any longer. There are too many uncertainties. The more I know about Chacon, the more I don't know, and I really hate relying so heavily on someone's firsthand information.

Go ahead, do whatever you want with the article. I'm not going to delete it myself, but if it is nominated for deletion, I'm not going to stop that from happening (like I did earlier, BTW). I'm sorry if I've gotten testy; I'm just a little frustrated that I still know so little for certain.

I do sincerely appreciate your civility and patience throughout this, but I'm done. Zagalejo 15:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

ONE MORE THING BEFORE YOU GO

Since you don't want to assist me with this anymore, and you will not delete the article, could you at least please post this latest revised article...I tried to post it myself, but still keep having the technical problem with Wikipedia in posting my changes. If you don't want to take the time to add the references, I can do that after you have posted the article on Wikipedia. Here is the article again....THANKS FOR ALL YOUR PREVIOUS HELP

I formatted the references for you. If the article is nominated for deletion, I will let you know. That way you can try to defend the page. Check in periodically.

I am sorry it had to end like this, since you seem like a reasonable person. Everything you wrote may very well be true, so perhaps you'll end up with the last laugh when all is said and done. I just don't think I can give the article my seal of approval with the current level of referencing. Zagalejo 00:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Christopher Chacon is considered a prominent authority on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is a writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist, having begun his career in entertainment as a master illusionist/magician.

A former field operative of The Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.), Chacon has traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of paranormal phenomena, including haunts and poltergeists, UFO close encounters, possessions/ exorcisms, miracles and divine intervention, all types of psychic/parapsychological phenomena, encounters with strange creatures and unexplainable anomalous phenomena.

In entertainment, Chacon’s most notable creation is the dramatic-adventure TV series, "PSI Factor: Chronicles of the Paranormal", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer. As writer, creator/executive producer and director of this TV series, Chacon produced 88 episodes that are currently seen in over 30 countries.

---

Christopher Chacon is considered one of the world's foremost experts and authorities on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is an acclaimed writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist. <ref>[10]<ref>[11]<ref>[12]

Chacon’s work in entertainment began as a young boy as a professional/magician illusionist and filmmaker. As a master illusionist/magician, he has performed to international audiences. His work spans from live Las Vegas theatrical production shows to major motion pictures and TV series. Most recently, Chacon was the creator/writer and executive producer/show-runner for the dramatic-adventure TV series, "Psi Factor", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer, which completed four seasons/88 episodes and is currently seen in over 30 countries. <ref>[13]<ref>[14]

Besides his work in entertainment, Chacon is one of a handful of known people who was a documented one-time former operative (investigator/researcher) of The Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.), the only legitimate scientific organization in the world that scientifically investigates and researches all types of anomalous phenomena (i.e. paranormal, metaphysical and supernatural phenomena). As an operative of O.S.I.R., Chacon traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of phenomena imaginable, from haunts and poltergeists to UFO close encounters, from possessions/ exorcisms to reported miracles, from incidents involving strange creatures to unexplainable anomalous phenomena. In addition, Chacon also specialized in the research and exploration into ancient mystical beliefs, obscure magical practices and the exploration into many myths and legends. He was involved with countless international expeditions and explorations surrounding ancient mystical and sacred practices, objects, texts, artifacts and the performing of obscure mythological ceremonies and supernatural rituals. While an active member in O.S.I.R. Chacon was additionally a member of many highly regarded scientific organizations including; The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, The New York Academy of Sciences, The Society for Scientific Exploration and The Center for Science Education. <ref>[15]<ref>[16]<ref>[17]

Because of his incomparable experiences with these extraordinary phenomena, he has been featured on countless TV and radio shows, documentaries and numerous publications throughout the world. Among the many TV appearances, include: the network news of NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, BBC, National Geographic Explorer, 20/20, Dateline, Unsolved Mysteries, Discovery Channel, Hard Copy, Sightings, The Learning Channel, Eye to Eye with Connie Chung, The Tom Snyder Show, just to name a few. <ref>[18]<ref>[19]

Although Chacon is no longer with O.S.I.R., he continues to travel the world on supernatural/paranormal-related expeditions and assisting people and groups who are plagued with volatile supernatural and paranormal phenomena. <ref>[20]<ref>[21]

In addition to his work in the entertainment industry and the assistance he offers to those who are encountering the paranormal, Chacon has also been working on several global humanitarian, environmental and wildlife projects. <ref>[22]

ADDITIONAL SOURCES ➢ TV- “NBC Network News”. October 1992. ➢ TV- “Hard Copy”. November 1992. ➢ Publication- “Who ya Gonna Call”. The Journal (Writers Guild of America Publication). February 1993. ➢ Publication- "Spook Stalker". People. 20 September 1993. p. 85 ➢ TV- “Fox Network News”. May 1993. ➢ TV- “National Geographic Explorer: Ghosts of the Bayou”. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Unsolved Mysteries”. (Multiple Episodes) 1991. 1992. 1993. ➢ Radio- “Mark & Brian Radio Show”. (Multiple Broadcasts) October 1993. May 1994. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Sightings”. (Multiple Episodes) PILOT EPISODE, October 1991, October 1994, November 13 1994, November 27 1994. ➢ Radio- “KABC Morning Show”. October 1991. ➢ TV- “The Other Side”. 1995. ➢ TV- “Home Show”. (Multiple Episodes) October 1991. October 1993. ➢ TV- “Bertice Berry Show”. November 1993. ➢ TV- “Eye to Eye with Connie Chung”. October 1993. ➢ TV- KCAL “Live in LA”. October 1993. ➢ TV- “MSNBC Presents the Tom Snyder Show”. ➢ Book- “Very Scary Almanac” by Eric Elfman. Published 1993.

Christopher Chacon

This version of the article was already nominated for deletion because it contained no sources. I rewrote it to include some citations. If you want to expand the article, feel free, but you have to cite your sources. Zagalejo 00:38, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

PSI Factor

Hi, I have reverted all your edits to this page. It seems (also looking at your edits to the OSIR page) that you are attempting to blur the line between fiction and reality. It is official policy that Wikipedia take an out-of-universe perspective. Please discuss any further edits in this line on the talk page for PSI factor. --Slashme 14:15, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Christopher Chacon

Couple of things:

• 1) Are you paying attention to the results of your edits? Nothing past the first referenced statement is showing up on the screen. (In other words, you're inadvertently blanking most of the page. Look at the bottom.) If you need help formatting references, please ask, but don't just leave the article like that. By doing so, you remove all of the article's categories, which makes it harder for people to find it.
• 2) In any case, most of your references are from IMDB and other websites. Whether you like it or not, most Wikipedians prefer newspaper and magazine articles to online materials. See Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. I'm not sure what the inaccuracies in the present version are; could you enlighten us? If there are problems, I'll try to fix them using more established resources. Note that at least one user thinks Chacon has been misrepresenting himself in his online biographies, so I think it would be wise to avoid those sources as much as possible.

PLEASE, try to communicate with us! We can't improve these articles unless we work together! Zagalejo 05:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

RECTIFYING "CHACON ARTICLE"

Thank you for responding back and advising me of the technical and content issues with the article.

Before I attempt anymore changes to repair this article, I would like to try and reason with those who are questioning its validity in hopes of finally rectifying this matter.

As you pointed out, one "user" thinks Chacon is misrepresenting himself, however this "user" is clearly not objectively assessing the placement of content nor the sources of it and almost blindly dismissing its validity with any contradicting evidence to support his claims, which appear to almost take on a "vendetta-like" quality. Firstly, from what I have been able to assess from communicating with the Webmasters of each of the sources, Chacon has NOT created any of his own biographies or articles....I know this for a fact since I was responsible for creating one of them myself and chatted with two other individuals who had created others being posted. It is true however that they do read similarly, but that is because we are all taking our information from the same sources and rather then trying to fabricate false or conjectured statements, trying to stay as true to the limited facts as possible.

Speaking of "facts", I realize that Wikipedians prefer to source information from magazines and newspapers, however, it was brought to my attention from the author, Eric Elfman who interviewed Chacon, that a majority of the articles used in the current Wikipedia article had misquoted or misrepresented Chacon and his statements in one manner or another. An example would be the statement that "Chacon was the Director of the O.S.I.R.". The facts are that Chacon was "one" of the "Co-Directors" of the Public Affairs "Department" of O.S.I.R. and NOT the overall Director of the entire organization. This was an error that Elfman himself had made in his book, "The Very Scary Almanac" and was therefore very forthcoming with the fact that writers/authors have made a variety of errors writing about Chacon, primarily because of their own zealousness or excitement about the articles, understandibly. Because the majority of information in the existing article appears to contain these type of inaccuracies, I wanted to correct the article once and for all with information that was confirmed by "DIRECT SOURCES" rather than conjecturing outdated articles. When I say "Direct Sources", I refer to the fact that I have personally contacted individuals to obtain quotes, facts or information to corroborate Chacon's information.

Because I was fortunate enough to communicate with Chacon's legal representation for an article I wrote about him, I was able to have his representation confirm the accuracy of the content in my article. I find it quite ironic that Wikipedians will not consider "internet sources" as reliable, when Wikipedia itself is an "internet medium". However, my direct sources (which include scientists, clients/patients/subjects, TV producers/directors and other writers) have confirmed my article, but I realize I am unable to post these individuals as validating my information since Wikipedia will not allow it.

Since you, Zagalejo, appear to be rational, objective and sincerely have the interest of Wikipedia in mind, I would greatly appreciate if you could contact me directly to assist in trying to rectify this article. Please contact me directly at: EntertainmentResources@Email.com THANK YOU.

Well, I really don't want to give out my e-mail address. Is there a reason why we can't discuss this here, or at my talk page? No offense, but I have no idea who you are, and you don't really know who I am, either.

In any case, we're walking into a tricky situation here. Wikipedia policy forbids original research, and thus we're stuck with using published sources. That's just the way it goes, and I'm sure similar situations have occurred throughout this site. You might want to take up your concerns with a WP:Admin or someone with more clout than I have.

In the meantime, I'll try to reword the article to make it less specific about Chacon's position with OSIR. Are there any other glaring errors in the present article?

I do appreciate your cooperation, though, and I hope I haven't seemed like too much of an ass. Do you know Eric Elfman? I owned a copy of The Very Scary Almanac when I was younger, and my fifth grade English teacher took it away from me because I was reading it in class. :)

See you around, Zagalejo 03:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Wow! I will tell Eric Elfman the story about having his book taken from you in class. What a coincidence...

I completely understand your reservation about using E-mails...I apologize for me my thoughtlessness. I'm having trouble using the "my talk" pages and the various communication methods set-up here in Wikipedia, mainly do to my ignorance and wan ted to simplify our communication. Talking via this "user talk" should suffice.

I will try and create a streamlined version of the currently existing article and post it here for your consideration. In the meantime, I will take your advice and take it up with Administrators. The link you gave me didn't point me into what specific department I should communicate with. When I got to the Administrator page I was overwhelmed with WHERE to go and HOW to submit a grievance submission. Could you please do me a favor and respond with a specific link directing me to the specific department or administrator which I can submit a request for help or grievance regarding this situation? OR...I could draft my grievance letter and post it here so that you could correctly forward it onto them for me. Whatever you can do to assist would be greatly appreciated. THANK YOU.

Yeah, why don't you just write it here, and I'll see what I can do with it. I'm not sure offhand if there is one specific place to post grievances, but I'll look into it and give you an update. Zagalejo 05:05, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

THANKS ZAGALEJO! When you say "write and post it and you'll see what you can do with it", are you referring to me writing the "letter of grievance" OR writing a streamlined version of the article?

Oh, I was referring to the letter of grievance. Sorry, that was vaguely worded. Zagalejo 18:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, Zagalejo, it's up to you now. Sorry its taken me so long to get back to this. The treadmill of studies, work and life are taking their toll. Anyway, here is the "OFFICIAL LETTER OF DISPUTE" that I would like to have submitted to the "powers at be" at Wikipedia. Please do whatever you can to help fascilitate getting this to the right Executive Editor and in rectifying this matter. Feel free to tweek my letter of dispute or the article itself accordingly. It's now also a matter of principal and I hope we get a reasonable rational advocate that will see how unprofessional, intollerant and childish WilliamC24 has been behaving. THANK YOU AGAIN!!!

Dear Wikipedia Authority/Executive Editor, I am appealing to your authority in a matter concerning a specific article I assisted in creating and was consequently deleted, primarily due to one specific user/editor who is zealously prohibiting the article from being posted for irrational reasons. I am hoping that you can please assist me in permanently allowing my article or a reasonable version thereof to be posted, prohibiting the unreasonable “user” from continuing to bully others on your site. The article is about: “Christopher Chacon”

One specific fanatical Wikipedia "user" (WillaimC24) “believes” Chacon is misrepresenting himself, however WilliamC24 is clearly not objectively assessing the placement of content nor the sources of it and almost blindly dismissing its validity with any contradicting evidence to support his claims, which appear to almost take on a "vendetta-like" quality. Additionally, WilliamC24 is himself breaking Wikipedia “non-bias” point-of-view as he clearly states in his argument against the article by admitting that he is a “skeptic” and therefore demands that no article be posted on Wikipedia that “defies his belief system”. He cites one specific article from the “Skeptical Inquirer” that questions Chacon’s abilities (which was later found to be gravely inaccurate by the author) and dismisses another article in “The Journal” (the official journal/magazine of the Writers Guild of America) that details Chacon’s credibility and supports his expertise. The very “user” who is rebutting this article for citing biased sources and preaching for a “neutral point of view” is basing his entire argument against the article on his own belief systems, choosing to ignore substantiated information, arguing with all other Users/Editors that his opinion is “law” on the Wikipedia site.

Firstly, from what I have been able to assess from communicating with the Webmasters of each of the sources, Chacon has NOT created any of his own biographies or news articles. I know this for a fact since I was responsible for creating one of the posted articles myself and chatted with two other individuals who had created others being posted. It is true however that they do read similarly, but that is because we are all taking our information from the same “confirmable sources” and rather then trying to fabricate false, exaggerated or conjectured statements, trying to stay as true to the limited facts as possible.

Speaking of "facts", I realize that Wikipedians prefer to source information from magazines and newspapers, however, it was brought to my attention from the author, Eric Elfman who interviewed Chacon, that a majority of the articles used in the current Wikipedia article had misquoted or misrepresented Chacon and his statements in one manner or another. An example in the existing limited article would be the statement that "Chacon was the Director of the O.S.I.R.". The facts are that Chacon was "one" of the "Co-Directors" of the Public Affairs "Department" of O.S.I.R. and NOT the overall Director of the entire organization. This was an error that Elfman himself had made in his book, "The Very Scary Almanac" and was therefore very forthcoming with the fact that writers/authors have made a variety of errors writing about Chacon, primarily because of their own zealousness or excitement about the articles, understandably. Because the majority of information in the existing article appears to contain these type of inaccuracies, I wanted to correct the article once and for all with information that was confirmed by "DIRECT SOURCES" rather than conjecturing outdated articles. When I say "Direct Sources", I refer to the fact that I have personally contacted individuals to obtain quotes, facts or information to corroborate Chacon's information.

Because I was fortunate enough to communicate with Chacon's legal representation for an article I wrote about him, I was able to have his representation confirm the accuracy of the content in my article. I find it quite ironic that Wikipedians will not consider "internet sources" as reliable, when Wikipedia itself is an "internet medium". However, my direct sources (which include scientists, clients/patients/subjects, TV producers/directors and other writers, as well as fifteen documentary and news TV appearances and three radio interviews) have confirmed my article, but I realize I am unable to post any of this information or these individuals as validating my information since Wikipedia will not allow it. I have however noted the TV and Radio references following the article.

I am please requesting that either your executive editors or another secondary User like, “Zagalejo”, who has been extremely helpful, professional and significantly more objective and rational then WilliamC24, be authorized to have the final decision on the article and editing thereof and permanently freeze and/or ban any future editing by any other Users like WilliamC24.

The article I am proposing for ‘Christopher Chacon’ is as follows:

Christopher Chacon is considered one of the world's foremost experts and authorities on paranormal and supernatural phenomena, anomalies, metaphysics and the occult. In addition, he is an acclaimed writer, director and executive producer for television, film, theatre and live-event attractions, as well as an author and performance artist. <ref>[23]<ref>[24]<ref>[25]

Chacon’s work in entertainment began as a young boy as a professional/magician illusionist and filmmaker. As a master illusionist/magician, he has performed to international audiences. His work spans from live Las Vegas theatrical production shows to major motion pictures and TV series. Most recently, Chacon was the creator/writer and executive producer/show-runner for the dramatic-adventure TV series, "Psi Factor", starring Dan Aykroyd, Michael Moriarity and Matt Frewer, which completed four seasons/88 episodes and is currently seen in over 30 countries. <ref>[26]<ref>[27]

Besides his work in entertainment, Chacon is one of a handful of known people who was a documented one-time former operative (investigator/researcher) of The Office of Scientific Investigation and Research (O.S.I.R.), the only legitimate scientific organization in the world that scientifically investigates and researches all types of anomalous phenomena (i.e. paranormal, metaphysical and supernatural phenomena). As an operative of O.S.I.R., Chacon traveled the world, investigating and researching thousands of cases of every type of phenomena imaginable, from haunts and poltergeists to UFO close encounters, from possessions/ exorcisms to reported miracles, from incidents involving strange creatures to unexplainable anomalous phenomena. In addition, Chacon also specialized in the research and exploration into ancient mystical beliefs, obscure magical practices and the exploration into many myths and legends. He was involved with countless international expeditions and explorations surrounding ancient mystical and sacred practices, objects, texts, artifacts and the performing of obscure mythological ceremonies and supernatural rituals. While an active member in O.S.I.R. Chacon was additionally a member of many highly regarded scientific organizations including; The American Association for the Advancement of Science, Federation of American Scientists, The New York Academy of Sciences, The Society for Scientific Exploration and The Center for Science Education. <ref>[28]<ref>[29]<ref>[30]

Because of his incomparable experiences with these extraordinary phenomena, he has been featured on countless TV and radio shows, documentaries and numerous publications throughout the world. Among the many TV appearances, include: the network news of NBC, CBS, ABC, FOX, BBC, National Geographic Explorer, 20/20, Dateline, Unsolved Mysteries, Discovery Channel, Hard Copy, Sightings, The Learning Channel, Eye to Eye with Connie Chung, The Tom Snyder Show, just to name a few. <ref>[31]<ref>[32]

Although Chacon is no longer with O.S.I.R., he continues to travel the world on supernatural/paranormal-related expeditions and assisting people and groups who are plagued with volatile supernatural and paranormal phenomena. <ref>[33]<ref>[34]

In addition to his work in the entertainment industry and the assistance he offers to those who are encountering the paranormal, Chacon has also been working on several global humanitarian, environmental and wildlife projects. <ref>[35]

ADDITIONAL SOURCES ➢ TV- “NBC Network News”. October 1992. ➢ TV- “Hard Copy”. November 1992. ➢ Publication- “Who ya Gonna Call”. The Journal (Writers Guild of America Publication). February 1993. ➢ Publication- "Spook Stalker". People. 20 September 1993. p. 85 ➢ TV- “Fox Network News”. May 1993. ➢ TV- “National Geographic Explorer: Ghosts of the Bayou”. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Unsolved Mysteries”. (Multiple Episodes) 1991. 1992. 1993. ➢ Radio- “Mark & Brian Radio Show”. (Multiple Broadcasts) October 1993. May 1994. October 1994. ➢ TV- “Sightings”. (Multiple Episodes) PILOT EPISODE, October 1991, October 1994, November 13 1994, November 27 1994. ➢ Radio- “KABC Morning Show”. October 1991. ➢ TV- “The Other Side”. 1995. ➢ TV- “Home Show”. (Multiple Episodes) October 1991. October 1993. ➢ TV- “Bertice Berry Show”. November 1993. ➢ TV- “Eye to Eye with Connie Chung”. October 1993. ➢ TV- KCAL “Live in LA”. October 1993. ➢ TV- “MSNBC Presents the Tom Snyder Show”. ➢ Book- “Very Scary Almanac” by Eric Elfman. Published 1993.

COMPLETE ARTICLE

If the "complete" article is not appearing in this "User Talk" section, if you click on the "edit" that pertains to this section, the entire article of mine appears. Not sure why it is not appearing in the article and is only visible in the dit mode, but it is there. Thank you.

UPDATED TALK

ZAGALEJO -- I've tried to send you a message through Wikipedia, but don't think it worked. I also tried continuing our discussion here in this "my talk" session, but for some reason "User talk" cuts out my complete comment that I post. If you open your User Talk, click on the "Edit" button on User Talk and you will see that my entire comment, complete with my version of the article, has been submitted into the User Talk system, but for some reason was not posted. Perhaps you can figure this out. I posted it again for you to submit my complaint to the Wikipedia editing executives.

FIXING ARTICLE

Hey back! Thanks for responding. As you can see, for some reason, my article inserted in this "USER TALK", as well as the actual article itself, only appears when you click on the "Edit" button. When checking out my last long-winded response which includes my sample article, you should click on the "Edit" just to make sure the rest of my submission isn't hidden. Anyway, I understand what you are saying about "changing Wikipedia policy"....it's just so frustrating that this one single Wikipedia user/editor is being so zealous on his misguided interpretation of Chacon's article. If you check my recent version of it again, not only do I have references after each paragraph, but have also noted over a dozen broadcast progarms that also confirm my information. Whatever you can do to get this matter solved and the majority of my article accepted would be fantaastic. Thanks again and I'll keep checking our "Talk".