Maybe I don't get the purpose of this site quite yet, but is negative information the preferred information. I provided an answer that was supportive of a theory and immediately got downvoted, so it seems that the tone is you are supposed to criticise theories, not support them, is that right? Is the idea to poke holes in theories, only?
I would speculate that your answer received downvotes because it made assertions not supported by evidence. The only two links in that answer were a Wikipedia link and a blog post. The requirements for answers on this site are quite different from other stack exchange sites since this is dedicated to skepticism. Please check the FAQ regarding this site.
Maybe I don't get the purpose of this site quite yet
Maybe the purpose of this site can be summarized by:
- This answer to 'How do I know that the information posted in this site is reliable?'
- This answer to 'No expertise exists in the humanities, only opinions?'
I didn't downvote your answer, but in summary I think that what your answer says is, "There was an ancient civilization called Tartessos, which someone has written about on their blog."
Is there any way in which your answer is better than Wikipedia's 'Location hypotheses of Atlantis'? The only way in which I think your answer might be better is that it's much shorter. Could you at least say why you chose to mention Tartessos, and not mention any of the dozen other theories? Or why the only reference you cited (apart from Wikipedia) is Professor Freund's blog?