From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search


I removed the list of Bible references again, and before anyone goes and adds it again, could you please justify it's inclusion?--Czaryah 17:06, 6 May 2007 (EDT)

For an article on anatomy there does seem to be a preponderance of Biblical quotations and I'm not sure what their purpose is. Surely anyone with a decent Bible reference program can find these for themselves. There was also a browser add-in mentioned on the main page and Aschlafly's talk pages several days ago but I can't seem to find it now. I am posting this so there can be a discussion about it rather than just removing them en bloc. BrianCo 03:48, 21 May 2007 (EDT)

I kind of agree that they are out of place. We could at least cut down on them. If you do remove some, type "see talk page" in the info box. DanH 03:52, 21 May 2007 (EDT)

I think it would be sufficient to leave the reference in the first paragraph about the Bible's general viewpoint. However, I'll give it 24 hours or so to see if there is any other response. Hopefully my spelling corrections will flag other editors' watchlists but I'll add a temporary see talk page notice. BrianCo 03:58, 21 May 2007 (EDT)
The article still contains a giant list of random sentences from the Bible that happen to contain the word "heart." The list isn't informative in the least about the heart, and while it does give some context for the use of the word, there are multiple, redundant examples for every usage. -Harmil 16:03, 7 June 2007 (EDT)

I like bible quotes as much as any Christian, but this seems a bit much. Is this an over-enthusiastic Christian trying to include God in everything (as they should, in a more abstract way)? Or is it a liberal smear, trying to fill Conservapedia with meaningless drivel to harm its reputation? In either case... needs a rewrite. - BornAgainBrit