Jump to content

Talk:Texas Citizens for Science

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Initial statements from the article's subject/creator

[edit]

Texas Citizens for Science is an advocacy group that works to protect the accuracy and reliability of science education in Texas. Its main activity is to oppose organized Creationism in Texas. Its website is http://www.texscience.org.

Texas Citizens for Science was founded in 1980 as the Committee for Correspondence for Texas. It changed its name to the Texas Council for Science Education in 1982. It changed its name to Texas Citizens for Science in 2003.

Most states have a Citizens for Science organization with similar goals as the national organization, the National Center for Science Education.

Reference stuff-ups

[edit]

TableManners:

  1. The title of the blog/article is NOT "The lowdown on higher education" -- that is the section title. The title is "Science education advocate to speak".
  2. Havard referencing is completely over the top for such a short article.
  3. Your edits somehow managed to suppress the "References" section, meaning that there was no linkages between the article [x]-tags and the Havard-based "Sources" section at the end.

Please stop over-complicating & stuffing up a stub -- especially one that you have just (and prematurely AfDed)! HrafnTalkStalk 05:59, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Latest stuffed up version now has references section, but it says: References

  1. Haurwitz 2008
  2. a b Haurwitz 2008
  3. Haurwitz 2008

Again, completely useless.HrafnTalkStalk 06:03, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is a bug in the template. There were no cites before. Now there are, and a few of them aren't working exactly correctly. Please let me try to fix it before edit warring. Thanks. TableMannersC·U·T 06:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Might I suggest that it is you who should get his citation-system working before attempting to overwrite it over one that is. And why do we need Harvard citation for a stub? HrafnTalkStalk 06:22, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(ec)Ah, never mind, I reverted myself to your version. Go ahead, I am done editing the article for a time. Thanks for your patience. TableMannersC·U·T 06:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying, a bit hard with everybody jumping down my throat at the Afd, on my talk page, and with edit wars. This is a low priority article so I don't know what the big deal was. The bug is in the template, not my use of the template, it seems. The Harvard reference template does not create unique #CITEREFs when the same author writes multiple works in the same year. TableMannersC·U·T 06:25, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TableManners, I'm sorry that this turned into such a storm-in-a-teacup, but you must remember that this is an article whose existence I've only known about for a few hours, which is already under AfD -- that tends to turn up the heat. For myself, I tend to prefer to reduce everybody's stress by {{notability}}-templating an article for a while before AfDing it. There's no requirement to do such, but it does dial down the heat somewhat. HrafnTalkStalk 06:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No sweat. It was not a speedy delete. Afds take some time to close, and I was actively working to improve and keep the article per sources pointed out by JoshuaZ (talk · contribs). TableMannersC·U·T 06:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but I have seen AfDs 'snowball' on the basis of incomplete/incorrect information before & be in danger of an early close on the basis of this -- which was why I was concerned about getting references in as soon as possible. No bad faith on either side, just each rushing a bit much. HrafnTalkStalk 06:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Schafersman

[edit]

I'm turning up references to a "Dr Steven Schafersman" who's a micropaleontologist (usually classified as a geologist, but might be considered a biologist) at universities in Florida and Texas. Can anybody confirm that this isn't the same person as the TCFS president? This Steven Schafersman appears to have gone to Rice University, have been a skeptic involved in the Shroud of Turin controversy, and to be anti-creationist among his other manifestations of skepticism. HrafnTalkStalk 07:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's the same guy. Was at UT Permian Basin until recently, but isn't any more - based on his age, he may have retired. Guettarda (talk) 08:04, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then merely calling him a "biology teacher" would appear to be inaccurate. Do we have a WP:RS on his full qualifications? HrafnTalkStalk 08:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet. Pretty sure this is he:[1]; note the "22 years of teaching", ad the "Ph.D. in Geology, 1983, Rice University". Also this:[2] which matches the other pieces. TCS has a Midland address, which the company covers Midland/Odessa/Permian Basin. Guettarda (talk) 08:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is from Steven Schafersman himself. My last name is often misspelled, as it was in the article about the VCU professor. I have edited perhaps a dozen WP articles, but I am no expert, so the content on this page and the one discussing TCS for possible deletion are a little overwhelming to me. A few weeks ago, editors created a new article on Christine Comer and added a section to the article on the Institute for Creation Research, and both mentioned Texas Citizens for Science, but there was no article for it in WP. So I thought I would create it, since no one else was going to do that. I first copied material from the "About" section on the TCS website for the WP article, but that was deleted (justifiably) because it was mostly a direct copy (which I discovered was not allowed, even when I specified that WP could copy anything on the TCS website). An editor suggested that I simply write some new original sentences, which I did. I thought WP needed an article on TCS.

Now, this is important: I NEVER knew that a topic had to be NOTABLE to be included in WP. I just thought it had to be a topic that was mentioned in other WP articles and that other people might be interested in it. I mean, WP has articles on very obscure plants and animals. I'm very happy that the WP editors agreed that TCS was notable enough to be included. You also have an entry for Kansas Citizens for Science, which deserves it. But so do the similar organizations in Ohio, New Mexico, Minnesota, Florida, and several other states. Now, I promise to not directly edit the TCS article in the future because this would be a COI, another WP injunction. So I will write in the article's discussion section (here) in case I see something that is incorrect. I am very grateful that others have added to the TCS article and included references (which I knew but hadn't included). The article right now is fine. Also, I want to thank the WP editors who supported TCS as a legitimate and "notable" article in WP.

On another topic, all my degrees are in geology, but I was trained in both geology and biology to become an evolutionary paleontologist. I am also a micropaleontologist, since I study microfossils among other fossils. I am also a geologist, since I make a living working as a consulting geologist in the petroleum industry. I also work as a consulting environmental scientist (air pollution). I am not, strictly speaking, a biologist, but I have sufficient training and credentials to teach biology in any Texas college and university, and I did teach biology, anatomy, and evolution courses several times at Texas colleges and universities and biology in high school. Therefore, it would not be inaccurate to call me a biologist. I and other scientists consider science teachers to be scientists (if they also, of course, adopt the scientific method and attitude; some don't), and biology teachers to be biologists. My vocation in academia was a teaching professor for 22 years. I have very few peer-reviewed scientific publications, but I have published articles and abstracts about paleontology and geology in the scientific literature. I have collaborated on several biological research projects and am doing that now (my wife is a biology professor). I also taught oceanography, astronomy, and environmental science for 15 years. Right now, I call myself a "consulting scientist" (just as Sherlock Holmes was a "consulting detective"). I am not teaching now, but working in industry and writing. I do spend a lot of time working on pro-science, anti-Creationism advocacy.

In 2003, about six newspaper articles mentioned TCS and me. The organization and I were mentioned in about twenty newspaper articles in the 1980s. I expect many more references this year. I have been interviewed by journalists over forty times for my activities (I actively oppose many pseudosciences, not just scientific Creationism).

I am very sorry that the TCS article has generated so much discussion in such a short time. This shouldn't have happened. Steven (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I just read the criteria for notability at WP:NOTE, so I understand what the issue was now. I will send Guettarda other references that cite TCS. Steven (talk) 16:45, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP:V

[edit]

"Verifiability, not truth" does not mean "pick a source with an obvious typo". Guettarda (talk) 16:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask who exactly do you believe is intentionally picking a source with a typo? TableMannersC·U·T 16:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Verifiability not truth could ruin the encyclopedia by filling it full of newspaper and internet errors. How does that promote NPOV. And intentionally, Guettarda wasn't saying intentionally. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:19, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Guettarda, I struck the preceeding comment as not useful to the discussion, as I already know the answer. But I do think that characterizing the source has having a "typo", and characterizing the use of the source as cherry "pick"ing is bad faith and a personal attack. There are a dearth of sources on this topic, and the source called him a biology teacher. If you have sources that contradict it, the way to fix it, as I have explained already, is to read the other sources, summarize them, and add the material and citation to the article. You should not remove cited material to promote your own POV. Thanks. TableMannersC·U·T 16:23, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
SqueakBox, I think you should take your point to Wikipedia talk:Verifiability, as Wikipedia:Verifiability is official policy, and not up for debate on an article by article basis, short of violation of some other policy. TableMannersC·U·T 16:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I am not a policy maker so I won't be doing that but I would point out that if you try putting errors into articles and then claim they are verifiable you are certainly not being helpful, and if you think verifiability means we should put errors into articles then I suggets you post to WP:V, not me. Otherwise you can please tone the attacks down, you are being completely over the top. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not accuse me of putting errors in the article. The source said X, I summarized X, and provided a link to the source. This is per wikipedia policy, and being characterized as a biology teacher is not exactly defamatory. Teaching is a fine profession. TableMannersC·U·T 16:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes but if he isn't a biology eacher? And besides the source was clearly unreliable and no evidence it was even referrign to the same chap, whom the TCS official webpage calls Steven Schafersman. Our biography policy (BLP) does not allow for mischaracterisation merely becomes an editor sees the mischaracterisation as being to an honourable profession, eg such a falsehood contradicting Schafersman's CV in a job interview would have profound BLP consequences. Clearly what you did was not per wikipedia policy anyway as the source Guettarda removed was unverifiable by any stretch of the imagination because it identified someone different or was just a typo, and that kind of typo is never a reliable source. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As Hrafn pointed out "biology teacher" is a mischaracterisation of Schafersman - that was discussed above. In addition, "Shafersman" is also an obvious mistake. Add to that, "Verifiability, not truth" needs to be taken with a grain of salt when describing living people. Guettarda (talk) 16:31, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll let others comment, because I think we have a disagreement here. TableMannersC·U·T 16:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should really familiarise yourself (a) with policy, and (b) with how policy is applied. Wikipedia guidelines and policy are not applied legalistically. Adding a factually incorrect statement just because you can find a source that says so isn't acceptable. Guettarda (talk) 17:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

His name is "Steven Schafersman" (as can be found in numerous mentions on the group's website), and he is/was a university teacher/professor/lecturer in geology/palaeontology/biology. I have provided references for this -- not outstanding ones, but mentions of his academic career are widespread enough that it is hardly controversial. HrafnTalkStalk 16:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that looks fixed now. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Textbook hearings in 2003

[edit]

It seems that the TCfS was last prominent in 2003, with the Texas SBOE biology textbook hearings. Schafersman's testimony can be found here. There appears to have been news coverage of their involvement, but I've been unable (as yet) to get my hands on full articles for that far back to confirm this. HrafnTalkStalk 17:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've found the following Fort Worth Star-Telegram article from 09-JUL-2003 that gets a quote from Schafersman on the subject, but does not directly mention his testimony: Evolution at Issue as Texas Considers Adopting New Biology Texts. I had to register in order to find it. Could somebody confirm whether, now that we have the URL, registration is still needed for access? HrafnTalkStalk 17:28, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GeoTimes, a publication of the American Geological Institute covers the issue [3] Guettarda (talk) 17:26, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Added. At 3.2k & 8 references (=400bytes/ref), this is now one of most heavily referenced stubs I've seen. ;) HrafnTalkStalk 17:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schafersman's testimony, from the TEA (starts on the p. numbers 85, which is the p.22 of the PDF).[4] Guettarda (talk) 17:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've put up bare-bones of this, including this transcript as a reference. HrafnTalkStalk 17:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Christopher at Skeptical Enquirer[5] Guettarda (talk) 17:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What we really need is an article on Melvin & Norma Gabler.[6] That's an interesting pair. Guettarda (talk) 17:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Other things

[edit]

Lengthy article on Texas Evolution-education situation

[edit]

Battle Against Teaching Evolution in Texas Begins -- may prove to be useful in this or related articles. HrafnTalkStalk 07:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Texas Citizens for Science. 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) 10:15, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Texas_Citizens_for_Science&oldid=1205693506"