Difference between revisions of "Talk:Animal kingdom"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 10: Line 10:
 
I thank you for continuing to try and improve Conservapedia, however this is a scientific article, not theological.  Therefore there is no place for religious viewpoints.   
 
I thank you for continuing to try and improve Conservapedia, however this is a scientific article, not theological.  Therefore there is no place for religious viewpoints.   
 
--[[User:Brainwalker|Brainwalker]] 14:46, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
 
--[[User:Brainwalker|Brainwalker]] 14:46, 14 May 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
You shouldn't suppress the Christian viewpoint just because you don't agree with it. This is ''Conserva''pedia, not ''Sciento''pedia! [[User:TylerD.|TylerD.]]

Revision as of 04:24, May 15, 2007

Ways to improve this article:

  • Not focused. The subject is "animal kingdom" but most of the text describes the other kingdoms. It doesn't describe what makes animals unlike other organisms.
  • Not accurate. There is dissension on whether there are five kingdoms or six; i.e. whether the archaea occupy their own kingdom.
  • Not sourced. The only link in the article goes to a discussion forum.
  • Contradictory. The article purports that protists are a distinct kingdom, but that it contains "weird animals." It also makes the assertion that "everything else" in God's Creation belongs in the protist kingdom -- should be "other organisms."

--All Fish Welcome 17:45, 13 May 2007 (EDT)

TylerD-- I thank you for continuing to try and improve Conservapedia, however this is a scientific article, not theological. Therefore there is no place for religious viewpoints. --Brainwalker 14:46, 14 May 2007 (EDT)

You shouldn't suppress the Christian viewpoint just because you don't agree with it. This is Conservapedia, not Scientopedia! TylerD.