The Creation Wiki is now operating on a new and improved server.
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
So you feel that Discovery Institute still is not secular, even though they claim they are secular?--Tsommer (Tony) 19:54, 6 August 2011 (PDT
- More to the point, they are a creationist group, although for PR reasons they often state they are not - basically trying to distance themselves from the Biblical creationists. They generally assert that IDs simply investigate and illustrate evidence of design, but you wouldnt look for it unless you believed it was there. Or a person might have become convinced of a creation because of evidence of design, but then again the person subsequently came to believe in creation.
- We are now categorizing the "Additional information" links as creationist and secular, because I dont really like the category noncreationist, so I've started using the former instead. In any event, we are categorizing DI links as creationist. --Ashcraft - (talk) 08:31, 12 August 2011 (PDT)
New pages suggestion
When you've written a new page, I suggest you ask someone to review it for clarity. I've noticed that while you write fairly well, there are often places in the articles you write where it's really not clear what you are trying to say. Often, it looks to me like it's the sort of thing that if you were saying it in conversation, your non-verbals would make it clear. Unfortunately, those aren't available when reading the written word.
The strength of a wiki is in the collaborative nature of the work. Too many of the pages here are the product of a single mind, or maybe of two. Without having multiple contributors to each page, this site ends up looking more like a group blog, with each page reflecting the input of a single member of the (mostly) like-minded group.
I wanted to sincerely thank you for your kind expression earlier. And tell you it means a lot to me. We might not share the same views on everything but I respect you kind consideration to my beliefs. I want to also ask you what you recommend I do? Since I don't want there to be more conflict yet I can't bare this unfair accusation. I have e-mailed Mr. Ashcraft but no avail (he hasn't replied yet). --Anaccuratesource 15:15, 14 January 2012 (PST)
- - Hey :) Still want to chat sometime? --Anaccuratesource 17:28, 15 January 2013 (PST)
- - I don't what that is sorry but I do have yahoo messenger. - (email@example.com)
Be careful not to edit pages that are under contruction. Generally you should wait at least a full day from the last edit before making changes to a page that is actively being worked.
- BTW - I did see after posting this that he had left a note on the talk page saying he was done before you edited the page.
Its OK to offer assistance or give encouragement, but you should not tell users what to do. Leave those contacts to me.
I did offer advice and assistance. At least I thought, letting somebody know not to edit main pages with nonsense. It is not a good idea. Isn't that assisting them in their understanding of the working of the wiki? I mean so I should not tell people, what not to do?--Tsommer (Tony) 19:48, 19 January 2012 (PST)
Offer assistance by helping them with formatting or convention (after they are done) as you have been, not by telling them what they should or should not do. Leave that to me and the policy and help pages. --Ashcraft - (talk) 08:07, 20 January 2012 (PST)
Hi! First of all, I do not speak english well. So, I apologize my further english grammar mistakes.
I am very glad to know this wiki. I am a creationist and a christian (lutheran). I thank you for the welcome message. God bless you. Luiz Alexandre Silva 07:53, 10 March 2012 (PST)
You recently posted a news item that does not meet the guidelines / convention for those entries. The publisher and date should be provided, and a one sentence description may also be included. Its easiest to simply note the convention used by the other news items and do the same.
Hi, I like to ask you a huge favor.
I am writing the article Weasel program and some texts are from my authorship. I would like to ask you to revise my text and criticize the content and the english grammar if it not ask too much. I will continue to write the article, but I need more opinions about the text.
I thank you very much any help you can give to me.
Luiz Alexandre Silva 05:37, 12 March 2012 (PDT)
- Thank you so much. I am almost finishing the article. I am running in my computer more steps, but now the running time is reaching 10 hours each time. I hope you like the article. God bless you so much. I am glad that I found this wiki. Hugs, Luiz Alexandre Silva 15:20, 13 March 2012 (PDT)
- Hi! I finished the article. Thank you for the help! Luiz Alexandre Silva 09:32, 14 March 2012 (PDT)
Ok. I will rewrite this section to avoid wikipedia verbatin and when I finish I would contact you to your feedback! Thank you again, Luiz Alexandre Silva 18:02, 16 March 2012 (PDT)
I wrote an article but I am very insecure about it (in terms of english grammar). I saw that you are helping me a lot with other articles and I would like to ask if you can revise the article Adauto Lourenço to me.
I thank you very much any help you can give to me.
Luiz Alexandre Silva 03:45, 16 April 2012 (PDT)
- Thank you for your help. God bless you! Luiz Alexandre Silva 13:16, 16 April 2012 (PDT)
Hi! I am working in an article entitled Jordan River. It seems to me that many parts of the article were copied from somewhere else by the original author (Jkuhntz). I am introducing new material that I have researched, but I'm not removing the original text. I hope that in time this copied material would be replaced. I have not removed anything in respect to the original author's work. God bless you, Luiz Alexandre Silva 09:41, 27 June 2012 (PDT)
First of all I would like to say that I changed the pt:Trindade article according your last changes. As far as possible I have tried to see the changes and keep updated articles in Portuguese.
I want to ask you yet another favor. I am writing an article called American Civil War (I have many books and magazines Strategic & Tactics on this subject and I intend yet to expand it). But again I am very insecure about it (in terms of english grammar). To me is more easy to build small phrases in english than larger ones. As is an article about American history, and it is not good English speaking readers to be face with a poorly written text, I would ask you could do me a favor and occasionally take a look to see if I'm making mistakes.
Thank you for any help you can give to me in advance. God bless you! Luiz Alexandre Silva 05:16, 30 September 2012 (PDT)
- Thank you very much! I did not see your answer before because it was on another page. Thank you for the encouragement. God bless you greatly!, Luiz Alexandre Silva 17:26, 4 October 2012 (PDT)
Hi! I would like to say that I changed the pt:História article (in process of translation) according your last changes. As far as possible I have tried to see the changes and keep updated articles in Portuguese. Also I want to thank you for the help with the article American Civil War. God bless you! Luiz Alexandre Silva 05:01, 7 October 2012 (PDT)
- Thank you, very much! I am glad that I am able to improve my English a little. I think write here on CreationWiki has helped me in this regard. I wish a blessed Sunday for you and your family! Luiz Alexandre Silva 11:28, 7 October 2012 (PDT)
My dear friend,
I finished a section on the article Artificial intelligence#The limits of AI about the book of Ray Kurzweil. can you help me revising the text? As I did long sentences may be that I have made mistakes or have used an English very differently from a native speaker of English. I wish a blessed Sunday for you and your family! Thanks again, Luiz Alexandre Silva 06:21, 3 November 2012 (PDT)
- Thank you very much for your help. No need to hurry, help me only when you have free time. God bless you, Luiz Alexandre Silva 08:56, 6 November 2012 (PST)
Please enable "rollback", at least for me and maybe Tony. It makes cleaning up after vandals much faster and easier. Thanks. ~ Webster (talk) 19:27, 9 December 2012 (PST).
I believe your re-edits to the free will article, towards an older version of it, aren't helpful.
- you use the word "objective" in regards to morality, where the rest of the article treats "worth" as subjective and condemns objective morality as original sin and pseudoscience related to nazi and communist ideology.
--Syamsu 08:09, 12 February 2013 (PST)
- also you are putting determinism and compatibilism up front, while they are already adequately dealt with at the bottom of the article.
- You also use lots of complicated terminology.
IMO the goal of the encycopledia should be for people to come away with a practical understanding of free will on a more formal level of logic. So to reinforce the understanding of free will they already have, which understanding is being attacked by naturalists (and is also under enormous pressure from original sin). That was my goal, I tried to make it broadly consistent with the logic people use in daily life when they talk in terms of choosing.
Biology (original sin ), society and personal ideals all put enormous pressure to do your best. This puts pressure on the concept of choosing to understand it fundamentally as "sorting out the best result" which is incorrect. My feeling is that you add to this pressure and create confusion about the concept of free will.
Also creationist science requires a practical understanding of free will qith which to do science.
You seem to be aiming for treating free will as a problem to think about, instead of emphasizing practical use. --Syamsu 09:36, 12 February 2013 (PST)
God said do not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and then "you" propose a science of ethics, based on absolute and objective right and wrong. I can understand this in terms of the ten commandments being set in stone. For example the commandment to honor your parents. When somebody hates their parents, the hatered tends to digress into hatered of self. And so it seems one has no option not to honor their parents, because it is not possible in the human heart. But this reasoning still depends on subjective identification of honor and hate, and cannot be called objective.
In any case I do not want to be a part of such sophistication, which is a fairly straightforward endorsement of original sin.--Syamsu 16:28, 13 February 2013 (PST)
I made some additions on the article Duane Gish. I would like to know if you can help revising the English text. As a foreigner editor I am insecure about the text constructions I´ve made and I know this is an important article. Thank you very much for any help you can give me. God bless you, Luiz Alexandre Silva 10:35, 22 March 2013 (PDT)
- Thank you, I was worried to have made a mistake in this important article. Thank you for your help! God bless you! Luiz Alexandre Silva 17:58, 24 March 2013 (PDT)