Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-28470887-20161115232638/@comment-5154907-20170106190502

How many pages on here provide "proof" and what is to be considered sufficient proof?

Even articles in peer-reviewed academic journals debate on how much supporting evidence can actually constitute proving the existance of an ability.

If you post an academic study as a source, someone will argue that their experimental procedure must have been flawed.

If you post a video or picture, someone will claim it was edited.

If you provide an anecdote, someone will claim that you're lying.

No matter what you do to provide evidence, there will always be a skeptic, and there will always be someone that denies the evidence no matter how much evidence there actually is.

If there isn't a standard set for what constitutes sufficient proof for an ability, then any page could be considered lacking in evidence by someone and be taken down.

If there is no standard of sufficient proof, then there shouldn't be a policy that demands that articles require sufficient proof.