Jump to content

Talk:Faraday Institute for Science and Religion

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Faraday Institute)

Merger proposal

[edit]

I am proposing that Denis Alexander be merged here for the following WP:MERGE rationales:

  • 2. Overlap: this article already has all the information contained in that short stub (that Alexander is this institute's director and that he edits Science and Christian Belief.
  • 3. Text: that article "is very short and is unlikely to be expanded within a reasonable amount of time"
  • 4. Context: Alexander is notable mainly (solely?) for his work for the Institute, so it makes more sense to discuss him in the context of it, rather than in isolation.

HrafnTalkStalk(P) 13:55, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded it substantially within what I consider a reasonable amount of time, and it was readily apparent that Alexander is considered notable and has been so for quite some time by CNN, the New Scientist, Nature, and others. So, uh, no. And please no more stealth redirects. Sumbuddi (talk) 17:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article still lacks non-overlapping material that isn't either (i) sourced to Alexander's Faraday Institute bio or (ii) a simple quotefarm of statements he's made. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, he's a multiply-published author of some quite considerable books, and also did significant scientific work (Google Scholar seems to give over 300 scientific papers. (I do know him but I this is NPoV) NBeale (talk) 19:42, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The bedrock standard is (depth of) third party coverage -- "multiply-published author of some quite considerable books" is irrelevant, unless and until covered by third parties. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 05:12, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That is relevant to notability. We should only merge if there is so much overlap between the two articles that there is no relevant information in A that is not/should not be in B. eg Alexander's book "Rebuilding the matrix" has had a number of reviews in reliable sources(eg here, here NBeale (talk) 22:42, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
So why haven't you added material to Denis Alexander based upon this & all the other reviews you state are out there? HrafnTalkStalk(P) 03:25, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<(a) I know Denis and it might be considered CoI. (b) I'm very busy, esp with a cosmology paper being sent to me that was inspired by a remark in Questions of Truth on top of my day-job work. Sorry. NBeale (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: here and here. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Diannaa (talk) 01:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Faraday Institute for Science and Religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Faraday Institute for Science and Religion. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:58, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]