| Revision as of 05:26, 1 March 2012 editDoug Weller (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Oversighters, Administrators263,782 edits →Religious big bang article: r← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:05, 2 March 2012 edit undoNorthamerica1000 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators708,032 edits →WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening invitation: new sectionNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| :It was supposed to say "verify source". Instead, it came out as "verify credibility", which displays "unreliable source". The statement tagged is, "Some accept the scientific evidence at face value, while others seek to reconcile the Big Bang with their religious tenets, and others completely reject or ignore the evidence for the Big Bang theory." This statement is ambiguous (some, others) and does not accurately represent the context (false equivalence) and specific examples cited by the source; it is more of an unattributed interpretation of the section about science and creationism. When we are dealing with controversial articles, it's best to use explicit claims made by published sources, not interpretations of web pages. I'm sure Wright's website is accurate, but that does not mean it was used appropriately in this article. ] (]) 12:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC) | :It was supposed to say "verify source". Instead, it came out as "verify credibility", which displays "unreliable source". The statement tagged is, "Some accept the scientific evidence at face value, while others seek to reconcile the Big Bang with their religious tenets, and others completely reject or ignore the evidence for the Big Bang theory." This statement is ambiguous (some, others) and does not accurately represent the context (false equivalence) and specific examples cited by the source; it is more of an unattributed interpretation of the section about science and creationism. When we are dealing with controversial articles, it's best to use explicit claims made by published sources, not interpretations of web pages. I'm sure Wright's website is accurate, but that does not mean it was used appropriately in this article. ] (]) 12:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC) | ||
| ::Ok, that makes much mores sense! ] (]) 05:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC) | ::Ok, that makes much mores sense! ] (]) 05:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC) | ||
| == WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening invitation == | |||
| {| style="border-spacing:2px; margin:0px" width="90%" | |||
| {| class="MainPageBG" style="width: 55%; border:1px solid black; background-color:#98FB98; color:#98FB98;font-size: 90%"| | |||
| {| width="100%" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="5" style="background-color:#98FB98" | |||
| ! <div style="margin: 0; background-color:#98FB98; border:1px solid #000000; text-align:left; color:#000000; padding-left:0.4em; padding-top: 0.4em; padding-bottom: 0.4em; padding-right: 0.4em;">] Hello, Viriditas: | |||
| Thank you for your contributions to ]{{ndash}} or ]{{ndash}}related articles. I'd like to invite you to join ''']''', a ] to improve horticulture and gardening articles on Misplaced Pages and coverage of these topics. | |||
| If you would like to participate or ], please visit the ] for more information. Thanks! <small><font face="arial">]<sup>]</sup></font></small> 04:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
Revision as of 04:05, 2 March 2012
 | In this world, hatred has never been defeated by hatred. Only love can overcome hatred. This is an ancient and eternal law. –Dhammapada (1:5) |
| This is Viriditas's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
| Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 |
Re: Urgently needed expertise
Done. :) SlimVirgin 01:47, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Religious big bang article
Um, that's a University website edited by Edward L. Wright - maybe you want to reconsider your tag? Dougweller (talk) 10:43, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- It was supposed to say "verify source". Instead, it came out as "verify credibility", which displays "unreliable source". The statement tagged is, "Some accept the scientific evidence at face value, while others seek to reconcile the Big Bang with their religious tenets, and others completely reject or ignore the evidence for the Big Bang theory." This statement is ambiguous (some, others) and does not accurately represent the context (false equivalence) and specific examples cited by the source; it is more of an unattributed interpretation of the section about science and creationism. When we are dealing with controversial articles, it's best to use explicit claims made by published sources, not interpretations of web pages. I'm sure Wright's website is accurate, but that does not mean it was used appropriately in this article. Viriditas (talk) 12:34, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, that makes much mores sense! Dougweller (talk) 05:26, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening invitation
 Thank you for your contributions to Horticulture– or Gardening–related articles. I'd like to invite you to join WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening, a WikiProject to improve horticulture and gardening articles on Misplaced Pages and coverage of these topics. If you would like to participate or join, please visit the project page for more information. Thanks! Northamerica1000 04:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC) |
|---|