Recently, I was asked to remove my answer from the question" Was the "Irish ghost video" staged? If so, how?" since it is theoretical, original data or whatever. I did remove it, now I unremoved it temporarily so that <10K members would see it.

My answer was considered original research despite that it is pointing out obvious things in the video that doesn't a specialist expertise to review. Fine. But, I expect this rule to be enforced everywhere on this site, which doesn't seem to be the case, take a look at this answer from this question "Is this ghost video fake?":

enter image description here

This answer is pure theoretical, original research, and compared to my high-quality answer that I deleted, it is very weak. I tried to flag it but it got declined.

enter image description here

So, can anyone explain how this answer is non-theoretical or non-original-research and accepted while mine isn't? Furthermore, if both answers are bad, don't you think it is unfair to apply the standards to some questions and not apply it to others?


A question that examines two alternative explanations, the evidence behind them, and then draws a likely conclusion is not necessarily theoretical.

  • its conclusion admits uncertainty
  • it does not attempt to do original data analysis
  • it brings hard evidence to the table (albeit circumstantial)

It is an answer based on evidence, some of which is specific to the subject of the question. In wikipedia terms, it doesn't take part in a controversy, it describes it.

I don't think it's a great answer, because it's very weak, but it's an answer and not theoretical: it should be eventually downvoted, but not deleted. As the claim was answered: "it does not need moderator intervention".

  • 1
    ... And yet the answer was deleted as well. Sep 29 '15 at 18:55
  • 2
    "it does not attempt to do original data analysis" - does the other one? All I've seen was a collection of (easily verifiable) evidence for the reader to judge. "it brings hard evidence to the table" - do you mean appeal to our understanding of physics and shifting the burden of proof? Sep 29 '15 at 19:03

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .