Misplaced Pages

User talk:Arturo 7: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:11, 30 August 2006 editJoshuaZ (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers31,657 edits →[] - {{tl|test3}} msg: my two cents← Previous edit Revision as of 21:13, 30 August 2006 edit undoArturo 7 (talk | contribs)634 edits →[] - {{tl|test3}} msgNext edit →
Line 202: Line 202:


: While I'm not sure Dunc should have given the above vandalism warning, I have also reverted your edition of the cat to a number of articles. For most of the people you added it for I'm not even sure the term makes sense in their time periods, and given that it wasnt a major issue for almost any of them it is at minimum over-categorizing. ] 21:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC) : While I'm not sure Dunc should have given the above vandalism warning, I have also reverted your edition of the cat to a number of articles. For most of the people you added it for I'm not even sure the term makes sense in their time periods, and given that it wasnt a major issue for almost any of them it is at minimum over-categorizing. ] 21:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
:: U r just parroting ur evolution ideas!!! C'mon who's a NPVOV admin here??? They WERE creationists, just READ their works =S. This "encyclopaedia" makes no sense with that POV thing u do...... ] 21:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:13, 30 August 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Arturo 7, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --ScienceApologist 19:34, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


A few different issues.

First, please note that I deleted Oopart since it was redundant to OOPArt and you said on the talk page that it was a mispelling. Second, regarding this edit: please be aware of Misplaced Pages's No personal attacks policy and also that Misplaced Pages's goal is to write neutral encyclopedia articles, not to debate the validity or not of specific ideas. Thanks. JoshuaZ 01:30, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:000 7289.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:000 7289.jpg. Misplaced Pages gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Misplaced Pages, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 11:04, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading such a cool picture of yourself. However, it needs an image tag. If you are the image creator, decide which tag you want to use. Here are a few tags you can choose from. Pick one, click 'edit' on your image, and add the tag at the end of the image editing page, on its own line. If you're not the artist, ask the artist which tag you should use. Thanks!
  • {{cc-by-sa-2.5}}—Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike. This is one of several CC licenses. This version permits free use, including commercial use; requires that you be attributed as the creator; and requires that any derivative creator or redistributor of your work use the same license.
  • {{pd-self}}—Public Domain. There is some question whether it is possible under existing law to release one's work into the public domain; but this is still the "license" of choice for some.

Thanks for your help! happy editing! Verloren Hoop 18:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Falsifiable

Just a note: you are using the word "falsifiable" wrong on your user page. You have currently written: The Genesis account is a falsifiable truth, as it cannot be proven wrong but that doesn't exactly mean it's right. "Falsifiable" means, roughly "can be proven wrong," so "it cannot be proven wrong but that doesn't exactly mean it's right" is only correct if you mean that the theory in question is not falsifiable. Just though I would try to clarify that, since it looks like either a misunderstanding of the meaning or else a typo. :-) --Fastfission 00:21, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And while we're on the topic of misunderstandings.

You may also want to be aware that Java Man was almost certainly not a gibbon. Among other problems, the skull is much to large. See . Also, the claim about part of it being found 70 miles away is a misunderstanding arising from the same group discovering 70 miles away the Wadjak skull pictured here . JoshuaZ 03:26, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks JoshuaZ for the awareness. Perhaps the femur was more recnt that the skullcap, so then as a matter of fact we must assume that they were not even related species. Java man had 940 cc, perhaps being most likely some king of athrophied human or something like that. You just got the skullcap. Java man is allegedly a homo erectus, just like the Peking man, right? That's just trusting in C14 dating, and for your sadness a recently dead seal in Antarctica was dated 1300 years old by C14. How could it have been 1300 years old if it had been killed 3 days ago?--Arturo #7 03:35, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't want to get in an extended discussion with you about this on Wiki (if you want to continue over email, that would be fine). I was merely pointing out that Java man was not at all Gibbon like. Also, I did not intend to make any claim that Java man is by itself very useful evidence- we have many other homo erectus remains at this point. Your others claims are similarly flawed or misguided. Note for example, that seals could easily be found to be much older by C14 dating than they are due to the reservoir effect (which is why when dating marine life using C14 one often needs to think carefully about what sort of life it was and what its habitat was (and why one in fact often uses other methods to cross-calibrate)). JoshuaZ 03:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Recreation of deleted material

Please do not recreate deleted material such as template:User christian... thanks. I've deleted this template. ++Lar: t/c 20:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

it's your stuff if you do believe or not in God, do not parrot your lame ideas into others. --Arturo #7 20:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
I prefer to keep discussions threaded, see the header on my talk page, so I've refactored to here, and you can answer here. I deleted this template under the criteria for speedy deletion, G4 (recreation of deleted content)... This template, and similar ones, has been debated and deleted multiple times. Please review our policies in this area. Also, the use of the term " parrot your lame ideas" could be viewed as incivil. Please review our civility policies and keep them in mind for further comments, thanks. Finally, there are review processes if, after reviewing our practices and policies, you really think this deletion was not justified... ++Lar: t/c 20:46, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
So then why was it deleted? =S--Arturo #7 21:41, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
CSD G4, as I said before, "Recreation of previously deleted material". This template is divisive and it (and close variants) have been deleted multiple times already. See the Templates for deletion archives. Note also that the template has been userified, if you really want to use it, see User:Xoloz/UBX/User_Christian and transclude it onto your page and change it around as you see fit. ++Lar: t/c 10:53, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
what do you mean by divisive? I'm just asking why it was deleted the first time.. There are templates for atheists and agnostics I guess, so why shouldn't there be a template for christians? Seems kinda suspicious..--Arturo #7 15:58, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
See WP:GUS and User_talk:Xoloz/UBX/User_Christian. If you are unhappy with this, take it to WP:DRV. This box has been discussed to death many times. Note that "X is bad and Y is bad and X exists so why can't Y exist" is invalid as an argument here. The atheist and agnostic templates need to go too. Sorry, I'm done with this, there's nothing more to say. ++Lar: t/c 16:29, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

A1 articles

Please stop creating singe line articles or articles that have nothing but a category. They are deleted on sight. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Caria civilization

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Caria civilization, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://s8int.com/page39.html. As a copyright violation, Caria civilization appears to qualify for speedy deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Caria civilization has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If the source is a credible one, please consider rewriting the content and citing the source.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GFDL, you can comment to that effect on Talk:Caria civilization. If the article has already been deleted, but you have a proper release, you can reenter the content at Caria civilization, after describing the release on the talk page. However, you may want to consider rewriting the content in your own words. Thank you, and please feel free to continue contributing to Misplaced Pages. --  Netsnipe    21:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently working on this article, and I'll edit on my own words but I used the s8int.com stuff as a basis for it. I'm trying to find more external documentation on the findingd, perhaps doesn't seem to work out so well. As it seems like www.misteromania.it is the sole site providing good information on the Caria unknown civilization, I'm going to ask for permission to translate and publish it, perhaps how could I put the authorization tag here? Could you explain me please? Thanks --Arturo #7 21:18, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Helpme tag

Do you require assistance? —JD 21:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks for coming! I was working on an article on an alleged unknown civilization near Girifalco, Italy. But a more in-depth research led me to just 2 results on Google about it, so that doesn't make sense. Is it just a hoax? --Arturo #7 21:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
I can't tell you if it's a hoax or not, but I can advise you on what you should do; but I'll have to see the page first. Also, in future, you should put the {{helpme}} tag on your talk page, and wait for somebody to answer it; they'll remove it for you. —JD 21:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
This alleged unknown calabrese civilization doesn't have a proper name and doesn't have so much sources. --Arturo #7 21:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Does the subject of that page has its own Misplaced Pages article? —JD 21:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I think you have to put the hang on on the article page not the discussion page.

Read the template on your article and follow the instructions. It tells you exactly were to put the hang-on. Mattisse(talk) 21:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Image tagging for Image:Titulus.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Titulus.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 12:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:User Architecture

This template was already deleted per WP:GUS. I have migrated your userbox. You need not do anything more. Regards, alphaChimp 00:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been looking at your contribs, and wanted to make the following suggestion:

I would like to thank you for your contributions to Misplaced Pages. However, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thanks again. alphaChimp 00:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

New location is User:Evan C/Userboxes/User Architecture. alphaChimp 00:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Creationism and WP:NPOV

In regard to Portal:Creationism, you may want to be aware that WP:NPOV applies to portals as well. JoshuaZ 02:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

  • In regard to
First, I don't believe there is a Portal:Evolution. Second, even if this hypothetical portal did treat evolution as a fact, that would only be an NPOV problem under a limited set of circumstances- for example if it noted that the vast majority of scientists accept evolution, or called it a "scientific fact" - the first would be defintely acceptable, and the second would be possibly with NPOV. Third, even if there were a Portal:Evolution the correct thing to do would be to bring up possible NPOV issues there not create a rival portal with the other POV (please see WP:POINT). JoshuaZ 02:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I mistook, in Biology portal evolution is treated as a fact. There's a WikiProject for evolution. And the main idea for this Creationism portal is not supporting it, it's rather debating issues between evolution and creation. A skeptical developing a creationism portal. Notice that is NOT a creationist portal (it would be more likely to support creationism as it's cevouted to it the term "creationist"), it is a CREATIONISM one, regarding it as a valid topic. Stop bothering with nonsense. You might be blind if you don't see the clear NPOV violation across Biology Portal. This portal will be treated according to Misplaced Pages's NPOV policy, rather than "consensus-defined" topics like mainstream science. Or does the word consensus mean true to you? If the entire catholic church has an unproven consensus over Mary's virginity, does it make it true? No. Consensus are for unproven stuff and their belief is a matter of faith, as they cannot be proven right. --Arturo #7 02:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
First, Wikiprojects are often given more leeway than normal space pages(since they are not encyclopedia content). Second, a Portal that claims that Creationism has "its roots in the truth behind the creation from a biblical perspective" is hardly NPOV regardless of what comments you make. Third, if you thinkt here is an NPOV problem at the bio portal, then bring it up there. However, there isn't one- the vast majority of biologists support and acknowledge evolution and to give any credence to creationism as a scientific idea would be undue weight. Fourth, even your claims contradict themselves because in the portal title you say that it is biblical and that it is scientific - theology and science are not the same things. As for the meaning of consensus, where science articles are concerned, we have well developed understanding of how to handle these matters. Remember, Misplaced Pages never cares about what is true, it cares about what is Verifiable. JoshuaZ 03:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Also, I'm curious as to what directly on the bio page you think is so POV. At present there seems to be little evolution on the page. Did you have a specific sentence in mind? JoshuaZ 03:09, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
It's hard NOT to figure out what is so POV.. Just look at the Major fields in Biology... don't you read the Tree of Life and numerous references to evolutionary biology? And take a look at the millions of evolutionist references in all of those themes. --Arturo #7 03:20, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't understand, so now referencing evolution is POV? Do you think those aren't major areas of biology? Are you arguing that there are not thousands of researchers in those areas? I would think that even most diehard creationists would agree that these are major areas of biology. They might think that the conventional understanding of those areas is wrong, or they might think that the entire basis for those areas is flawed, but they would agree that those are major areas. Am I missing something here? (And keep in mind that even if it were POV, my above other comments still apply, especially WP:POINT) JoshuaZ 03:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
They refer as if they were essential and factual fields of biology. And oh I'm sorry, they're not. They're everything but a fact. Anyway I'm not interested in that portal, I'm developing this one as a true-false issue, not to counter any other wikiproject (a.k.a. Misplaced Pages:Wikiproject Evolutionary biology and its senseless references (nothing in biology makes sense if not under the light of evolution). Thanks for NPOVing the intro. --Arturo #7 03:34, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I didn't touch the intro, someone else did. I also don't know what you mean as a true-false issue, but I can't reiterate more, that Misplaced Pages is about verifiability, not truth. Also as I've attempted to explain before, Wikiprojects and portals are different and have very different rules applying to them. Additionally, I don't see anywhere the words "essential" and "factual" were used there. JoshuaZ 03:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
(reduce indent) It seems to me that Arturo is really trying to create what should be a blog or private web page, not a WikiPortal. In addition, the selection of categories seems to be clearly POV driven, rather than following any logical rationale. For example, I'm at a loss as to how "Jesus" plays a part -- that seems to be a bit outside the issue. I'll need to look over the portal page further to see if any other clearly POV-driven cats/subjects/etc., play a part. •Jim62sch• 09:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Jesus will be used to show creationism-christianiy incompatibility. Thanks Arturo #7 16:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Er what? Your saying that Jesus shows that creationism and christianity are incompatible? I know a few people who think that, but given your earlier comments that seems a bit odd coming from you. Incidentally, you may want to be aware that a Wikiproject and a portal are very different- projects are behind the scenes for organizational purposes, not encyclopedic in themselves. Thus, projects should not be listed in "related portals" JoshuaZ 16:36, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
This is my first portal, and I'm working on the scheme of Biology Portal for it. I'm sure I'll make mistakes, like listing projects in related portals or putting a NPOV-violating intro, but it'd be smarter to correct these mistakes instead. And as a matter of fact, if you claim that this portal has a NPOV violation, tell me WHERE and I'll correct it. Just look at the numerous references to anti-creationism stuff, like evolution, continental drift and the Big Bang theory Arturo #7 16:45, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Er, I'd be highly surprised if the bio portal had anything about the Big Bang (that's physics and cosmology, not bio and has nothing to do with biological evolution)- a glance through confirms that there isn't anything there. At present your portal seems mainly NPOV, if any specific issues come up, I will be happy to point them out. (I also took the liberty of reincluding the project list and labeling them as projects rather than portals which should deal with that). JoshuaZ 16:48, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Lol, I refered to the anti-creationism references found in the Creationism Portal. Thanks for moving the project list! Arturo #7 16:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Ah, that makes much more sense. JoshuaZ 16:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey dude, the "feat" lists can be edited for changing once a while or they have to be edited maunaully every day? Arturo #7 16:57, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you are reffering to. Could you give a link? JoshuaZ 17:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
Creationism's selected picture. I can't stand how to set a list of featured pictures for them to change daily. Is it possible? --Arturo #7 17:03, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a way to do so. For most portals that I keep track of they change it manually, and only once every few days or weeks. Only the very large portals with a lot of contributors change things daily. If you want a possible way of doing it I would ask on Misplaced Pages:Village pump (technical). JoshuaZ 19:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)


Mystery Stone

Good news, we were given permission to use the images! I've put them back up, but I'm thinking of adding a different one for the second one. Have you seen the Historical Society's picture of the back of the stone? I think it's a better picture of the symbols we are describing in the article, so I may upload it later today.--TurabianNights 18:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh, thanks so much! Currently I'm trying to re-edit the Noah's vineyard article as it was created when I was almost going to sleep so it lacked of any encyclopedic content at all, so that's why I erased it. I'll re-edit it and perhaps I'll look for more OOParts like that. Seems like a great topic for debate. Arturo #7 18:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
While I've got you on the line here, could we standardize OOPArts? I see them listed alternately as OOPArts and OOParts - I believe the former is the more correct, since "Art" is a separate word. As it is now, it looks like we're talking about "Out Of Parts" instead of "Out Of Place Art's." Thanks--TurabianNights 18:30, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Also, I'm not sure Noah's Vineyard is an OOPArt, judging from what I've dug up about it. There's so little material on it, and most of it from Wyatt himself, don't you think it would do better as a section on the Wyatt page than a little stub in its own right?--TurabianNights 18:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
I've thought something else about it. On Wyatt's entry it already lists his claimed discoveries, so we could take a deep look at them and create an entry like Ron Wyatt's alleged discoveries for a general detailed view for all of them (ranging from Noah's Ark, the Ark of the Covenant and the Exodus.Arturo #7 18:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Is there enough literature on that not written by Wyatt? I agree that could be very interesting.--TurabianNights 18:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... on Noah's Ark I've seen a lot of TV shows related to it, specially on the History Channel, and some about Wyatt's findings about the Exodus on a few creationists sites. I'll check them out on Google.Arturo #7 18:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Just did a little Googling myself - don't know how reliable tentmaker.org is, but they've sure got Wyatt's number! Also, ]. Work it up and we'll see how it goes - there is already some analysis of Wyatt's findings on the Wyatt page, and we wouldn't want things to get too redundant.--TurabianNights 18:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
The more I read the current Ron Wyatt article, actually, the less I feel we need a separate page analysing his finds - what if instead we were to put info about Ron Wyatt onto the pages in question - Searches for Noah's Ark, Mt. Sinai, Sodom and Gomorrah etc. etc.? They'd probably be more apropos there.--TurabianNights 19:44, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Check this out: Ron Wyatt's alleged discoveries. I'm currently working on it, but I'll go out to my beach house for a few days (short vacation here in Chile =D) and I'll edit it later on next tuesday or wednesday. Check it out and tell me what you think about it. I'll later add a further research on each one of the alleged discoveries. Arturo #7 19:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:VFD

Do not remove WP:VFD notices from articles. I strongly suggest you restore it and make your case at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Ron Wyatt's alleged discoveries. — Dunc|☺ 14:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Noah's_ark.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Noah's_ark.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Misplaced Pages's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions. 08:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

August Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: To-Do List
The Esperanza To-Do List is a place where you may list any request, big or small, for assistance. If you need help with archiving your usertalk, for example, all you need to do is list it here and somebody will help you out. Likewise, if you need help with some area of editing on Misplaced Pages, list it here! Again, any matter, trivial or not, can be placed on this page. However, all matters listed on this page must not be of an argumentative nature. You do not need to be a member of Esperanza (or this program) to place or fulfill requests on this page. If you don't have any requests, consider coming by and fulfilling a few! This program has not been very active, but has lots of potential!
What's New?
In order to help proposed programs become specific enough to make into full-fledged programs, the In development section of the proposals page has been created. Proposals that are promising, but need to be organized in more detail are listed here. Please take a look at what is there, and help the proposals turn into programs.
To improve both the layout and text of the front page, in an attempt to clarify the image of Esperanza, the front page is going to have some redesigning take place. Please take your creative minds to Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/Front page redesign to brainstorm good ideas.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
The last AC meeting (full log)
  1. In order to make sure all users who join Esperanza are welcomed, a list of volunteers who are willing to welcome new Esperanzians is at Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/Members#Esperanza_welcomers. Please add yourself if you are interested; we want to make sure all new Esperanza members are welcomed!
  2. The In development section of the proposals page has been created.
  3. Proposals page: Some proposals have been moved to the aforementioned "In development" section, some have been left as a proposal, and others have been archived. For those proposals that were a good idea but didn't necessarily constitute a program, General Esperanzial Actions has been created.
  4. Two small pieces of charter reform will be decided on in a straw poll at Misplaced Pages talk:Esperanza/Governance. One involves filling the position of any councillors who may leave, the other involves reforming the charter.
  5. Until cooperation with the Kindness Campaign is better defined, it remains as a proposed program.
  6. There is a page for discussing the front page redesign.
Signed...
Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, Freakofnurture, and Titoxd
05:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

category:creationists - {{test3}} msg

Straight {{test3}} message for making edits clearly not meeting WP:V, WP:RS:

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Misplaced Pages. — Dunc|☺ 21:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

While I'm not sure Dunc should have given the above vandalism warning, I have also reverted your edition of the cat to a number of articles. For most of the people you added it for I'm not even sure the term makes sense in their time periods, and given that it wasnt a major issue for almost any of them it is at minimum over-categorizing. JoshuaZ 21:11, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
U r just parroting ur evolution ideas!!! C'mon who's a NPVOV admin here??? They WERE creationists, just READ their works =S. This "encyclopaedia" makes no sense with that POV thing u do...... Arturo #7 21:13, 30 August 2006 (UTC)