Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 30:
Line 30: + +
Conservapedia talk:Evolution two (view source)
Revision as of 12:28, April 25, 2007
, 12:28, April 25, 2007→A beginning
I think that the structure you propose is pretty good. I foresee potential difficulties in the criticism sections as you and I work out which view gets the last word on any given point. But I am sure with some good will we can see it through to a successful result. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] <sup>[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]</sup> 20:22, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
I think that the structure you propose is pretty good. I foresee potential difficulties in the criticism sections as you and I work out which view gets the last word on any given point. But I am sure with some good will we can see it through to a successful result. --[[User:Horace|Horace]] <sup>[[Conservapedia:Requests_for_adminship#Support_2|Vote Horace for sysop]]</sup> 20:22, 24 April 2007 (EDT)
:It's a start, but sometimes the first intro paragraph on many articles can get weighty, with too much stuff added, too much of a mix tossed in, when it should be a simple statement introducing the subject to the reader. Since I feel that the article will probably fall under the new title "evolution vs. creation", we'd want some simple sentences at the immediate onset that state what evolution is, followed by what creation is, followed by a third which states something to the effect that both are at odds with one another. Because we each have our own beliefs in the subject, there's the temptation to add in the personal "I hate evolution!" or "Creation sucks!" lines...which is what we're going to have to learn to avoid. We'll experiment a few times with the into, just to see how it turns out. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 08:28, 25 April 2007 (EDT)