The result was keep. No consensus to delete, and no clear decision on a target, so that is left as a separate editorial discussion outside AfD Fritzpoll ( talk) 17:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC) reply
I am completing this AFD nom for
User:Nowimnthing, who added the {{subst:afd}} tag approximately half an hour ago, but hadn't yet followed up here.
Nowimnthing wrote "almost the textbook example of
POV forking" on the
article talk page. (I'm still neutral, but will come back with an opinion on deleting once I've read more.) My opinion below.
Dawn Bard (
talk)
15:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
reply
Wikipedia should have lots of articles on different aspects of evolution, and it does. There's natural selection, speciation, evidence of common descent, evolutionary history of life, and history of evolutionary thought. There's also evolution as theory and fact, objections to evolution, and creation-evolution controversy to present alternative views. I could go on and on.
In fact, I think I will. We have evolutionary developmental biology, human evolution, genetics and the origin of species, inception of Darwin's theory, reaction to Darwin's theory, non-Darwinian evolution, and even evolutionary ethics.
This huge morass of articles for one subject is confusing and makes it harder for the end-user to navigate through and find the content they seek. (It's okay for experienced Wikipedians who can use categories proficiently, but I'm talking about end-users rather than editors. Few end-users are even aware of categories.)
More articles on the same subject also allows POV forking (accidental or deliberate) and makes it hard to keep track.
I'm convinced this content belongs within the articles we already have rather than in yet another new article.— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 20:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC) reply
The result was keep. No consensus to delete, and no clear decision on a target, so that is left as a separate editorial discussion outside AfD Fritzpoll ( talk) 17:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC) reply
I am completing this AFD nom for
User:Nowimnthing, who added the {{subst:afd}} tag approximately half an hour ago, but hadn't yet followed up here.
Nowimnthing wrote "almost the textbook example of
POV forking" on the
article talk page. (I'm still neutral, but will come back with an opinion on deleting once I've read more.) My opinion below.
Dawn Bard (
talk)
15:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
reply
Wikipedia should have lots of articles on different aspects of evolution, and it does. There's natural selection, speciation, evidence of common descent, evolutionary history of life, and history of evolutionary thought. There's also evolution as theory and fact, objections to evolution, and creation-evolution controversy to present alternative views. I could go on and on.
In fact, I think I will. We have evolutionary developmental biology, human evolution, genetics and the origin of species, inception of Darwin's theory, reaction to Darwin's theory, non-Darwinian evolution, and even evolutionary ethics.
This huge morass of articles for one subject is confusing and makes it harder for the end-user to navigate through and find the content they seek. (It's okay for experienced Wikipedians who can use categories proficiently, but I'm talking about end-users rather than editors. Few end-users are even aware of categories.)
More articles on the same subject also allows POV forking (accidental or deliberate) and makes it hard to keep track.
I'm convinced this content belongs within the articles we already have rather than in yet another new article.— S Marshall Talk/ Cont 20:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC) reply