Talk:Human: Difference between revisions
imported>Larry Sanger (New page: Please expand this soon--at present it's a perhaps intriguing but still embarrassing microstub, and would have to be deleted soon without more work. Also, I hate to say it, but the articl...) |
imported>Kim van der Linde No edit summary |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Please expand this soon--at present it's a perhaps intriguing but still embarrassing microstub, and would have to be deleted soon without more work. Also, I hate to say it, but the article's beginning does not bode well: particularly in the opening sentences, the article should not make claims that are politically contentious. See [[CZ:Neutrality Policy]]: obviously, not everyone would agree that humans "have an unfortunate tendancy [sic] to soil their own environment," even though there is no doubt universal agreement that humans ''do'' occasionally soil their environment. In any case, many (probably most) people who agree with the sentiment, however expressed, would not agree that it is so important a fact ''about human beings'' (out of ''all'' the things one could say about human beings) that it belongs in the second sentence. That smacks of activism, quite frankly. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 21:49, 18 October 2007 (CDT) | {{subpages}} | ||
Please expand this soon--at present it's a perhaps intriguing but still embarrassing microstub, and would have to be deleted soon without more work. Also, I hate to say it, but the article's beginning does not bode well: particularly in the opening sentences, the article should not make claims that are politically contentious. See [[CZ:Neutrality Policy]]: obviously, not everyone would agree that humans "have an unfortunate tendancy [sic] to soil their own environment," even though there is no doubt universal agreement that humans ''do'' occasionally soil their environment. In any case, many (probably most) people who agree with the sentiment, however expressed, would not agree that it is so important a fact ''about human beings'' (out of ''all'' the things one could say about human beings) that it belongs in the second sentence. That prominent placement smacks of activism, quite frankly. --[[User:Larry Sanger|Larry Sanger]] 21:49, 18 October 2007 (CDT) | |||
Latest revision as of 06:48, 19 October 2007
Please expand this soon--at present it's a perhaps intriguing but still embarrassing microstub, and would have to be deleted soon without more work. Also, I hate to say it, but the article's beginning does not bode well: particularly in the opening sentences, the article should not make claims that are politically contentious. See CZ:Neutrality Policy: obviously, not everyone would agree that humans "have an unfortunate tendancy [sic] to soil their own environment," even though there is no doubt universal agreement that humans do occasionally soil their environment. In any case, many (probably most) people who agree with the sentiment, however expressed, would not agree that it is so important a fact about human beings (out of all the things one could say about human beings) that it belongs in the second sentence. That prominent placement smacks of activism, quite frankly. --Larry Sanger 21:49, 18 October 2007 (CDT)