Talk:Solway Firth Spaceman

David Clarke's new on-camera statement February 2026

Journalist-folklorist David Clarke stated a new opinion on the Solway Spaceman photograph in an on-camera appearance (brief clip of appearance but not of statement) in a British TV series in February 2026. The quotes from him currently in the article re overexposure are from 2014. On February 24, 2026 he appeared in the debut episode of the hour-long series Britain's X-Files and gave a new position statement (below). Unfortunately, the episode was telecast on the History channel UK and does not appear to be acceptable as a source per WP:RSPHISTORY ("Generally unreliable"). The end card on the episode says "A Monster Films Production For Hearst Networks UK (c) Monster Films (Wales) Ltd MMXXVI [2026]". Hearst Communications owns History networks worldwide. An employee of Hearst Networks UK is listed as an Executive Producer in the episode's credits. Hearst, however, is not the copyright owner of the series, so it might end up in the future being independently available. Here is what Clarke says, which ends the episode and the Solway Spaceman segment (the episode has two other unrelated segments preceding it):

I think what happened was, his wife sort of momentarily walked behind the camera into the background, turned her back, and that's when he took the shot. And what you're seeing is the light reflecting off her dress as she turns around and walks back behind the camera. And if he was concentrating on getting a really good shot of his daughter, he wouldn't necessarily remember his wife getting into the background of the shot just for a few seconds. And she might not have even realized that that's what had happened herself. So, that is my best guess, but apart from that I haven't a clue. — David Clarke, "Solway Firth Spaceman" segment, Britain's X-Files, S01 EP01, February 24, 2026

I do note that while History is considered generally unreliable as a source, that is not the same as completely so and WP:RSPUSE says: "Context matters tremendously when determining the reliability of sources, and their appropriate use on Wikipedia. Sources which are generally unreliable may still be useful in some situations." The situation that matters here is that it is not the narrator, host, or other on-camera commentator of the episode repeating Clarke's statement, it is Clarke himself on camera saying it and the episode serves only as the medium making it available, and again the series is not copyrighted to History UK or Hearst. The title of the production company, Monster Films, appears to refer to murderers and not cryptids or mythological beings. On IMDb it has a long record of producing true-life crime documentaries and series. Regarding Clarke's new statement, in photography, light reflecting off of an object causing it to appear white is called specular highlight and is not the same as overexposure. This is why I think his revised opinion in 2026 to a technically different explanation could be a useful addition to the article, even if just a single sentence. I don't feel strongly enough about this myself, however, to raise a question about Britain's X-Files at WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, but I did want to note this here to inform editors to be on the lookout in case Clarke's new statement or a similar one is repeated in a more acceptable source someday. 5Q5|^✉ 14:14, 26 April 2026 (UTC)