User talk:Ed Poor/Aspects of evolution

=Discussion about ending this project=

=Other discussion about this WikiProject=

This project is an outgrowth of several attempts I've made to distinguish between various usages of the word "evolution" in Wikipedia articles related to the creation-evolution controversy. Many of these articles have been destroyed, either by reducing them to redirects or AFD'ing them. I suspect that the destroyer(s) either:
 * are deliberately trying to censor opposing POV (i.e, they themselves are POV-pushers); or,
 * do not understand the fine distinctions involved

If it's the former, admin action may be required to squelch their disrpution. But I'm hoping it's only ignorance, because that's curable. Uncle Ed 19:02, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Reads like an article

 * Ed, the project page reads like an article, not a wikiproject. What is the goal of this project?  What you have written reads more like an article.  (Do we have one on this question or is it appropriately covered in some existing article?) -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  19:42, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * It can't be had both ways: if it reads like an article, then it should be put back in article namespace but NOT deleted.


 * If it's not good enough to be an article, then it should remain in Wikipedia: namespace and be used to guide article collaboration. Uncle Ed 19:54, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * More to the point, the goal is to gather information pertinent to the PURPOSE of clarifying dozens of instances in which the word "evolution" is used unclearly. The lack of clarity has to do specifically with confusing one aspect for another. Did you read the project page?


 * Anyway, I was hoping you and FeloniousMonk might join the project - even Dunc, why not? - and help me make the terms clear.


 * People keep using evolution to mean one thing while other people use it to mean another, and their statements are mutually unintelligible. (That's for those writing in good faith)


 * Then there are those advocates (Creationists and "evolutionists" alike) who deliberately confuse or confound these meanings, to gain a propaganda advantage.


 * Hell, there's even Kent Hovind, who has made up SIX different aspects of evolution, only two of which even fall under the field of biology. --Cyde Weys talkcontribs 21:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)


 * The goal of the project is to help contributors make the articles touching on evolution clear to our readers. Uncle Ed 20:03, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


 * Was it deleted? Under what name?  I'd say this info is important.  However, I don't expect a consistent use of a term that is in dispute.  I think the most I would hope for is that the dispute is mentioned each time an articles uses one variation of the term's meaning. -  T&#949;x  &#964;  ur&#949;  20:22, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

It was already deleted: Aspects of evolution