Talk:Beyond Belief (symposium)

Unsourced content from Beyond Belief: Science, Religion, Reason and Survival
See unsourced content here, could be sourced and then added to this article. Cirt (talk) 02:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced content from Beyond Belief: Enlightenment 2.0
See history for unsourced content, that could be sourced, and then added here. Cirt (talk) 02:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced content from Beyond Belief: Candles in the Dark
See history for unsourced content that could be sourced, then added here, if sourced. Cirt (talk) 02:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

The sub-articles should be improved, not razed and redirected
I have reverted the re-direct here of a long article, worked on by many Wikipedians, about the first conference in this symposium series. While I agree with Cirt that many of the webpages related to the The Science Network have problems with tone and sourcing, I think we should work to improve them, not just raze them down to uninformative single paragraphs.

At least the first of these symposia was a significant event that got news coverage still online three years afterward. I am going to work to improve that article with material based on those sources.

In my opinion, what would be most informative for our readers would be to have separate articles for each of the conferences. I do agree, however, that it would make sense for material on the symposium series in general -- that is, this article Beyond Belief (symposium)--should be a subheading in the The Science Network article. betsythedevine (talk) 14:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think all of the conferences would be best covered here, on one page, as opposed to big long advertisement pages. Cirt (talk) 19:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree that conference reports should not be advertising. The problem is that the actual informative material in the article on the first conference is so long that it does not fit comfortably into "one page" devoted to the series as a whole. I think it is better to improve that article so that it is not advertising and then link to it from a brief mention in the "Beyond Belief" section of the ''Science Network" article.
 * Many people will be interested just in getting an idea of the conference series as a whole; your proposed merged article will be just what they want. Others will be interested in more information about one conference or another. If we keep the separate articles, we can benefit people of type 2 without imposing on people of type 1. betsythedevine (talk) 19:24, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is so long because it is unsourced, and written like an advertisement on their organization's webpage, as opposed to conforming to WP:NPOV, and using secondary sources to describe the conference. At present the wiki page instead looks like some promo/spam sort of page you'd find on their website, advertising and promoting their event. Cirt (talk) 19:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for re-considering and helping to improve the article. People who want to look at the list of speakers or sessions can easily find them on the official website, but the article now makes clear what was interesting about the event. The funny thing is that the previous, much longer version did not include the material from the NYT article which is much more interesting and informative than profuse lists and credits. But don't you think it is still too long to fit comfortably as a sub-section into another article? betsythedevine (talk) 22:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, now that the sub-page has been improved I think it would make it now easier to merge into the page on the Symposiums. Cirt (talk) 23:09, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Beyond Belief: Science, Religion, Reason and Survival which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:03, 3 March 2017 (UTC)