Talk:Paul Nelson (creationist)

How he is notable?

How he is notable? It appears he may not pass WP's professor test. C56C 16:56, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

This guy is a nothing. This article shouldn't even exist. Johnlubic (talk) 20:38, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Look into "Ontogenetic Depth". Five years ago he created the term and brought it to a scientific conference. He was heavily criticized for having no explanation, methodology, or results. He said he would come with a detailed explanation "tomorrow". Everyone is still waiting. Some even celebrate a "Pail Nelson Day" It's pretty funny, really. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.210.4.245 (talk) 13:26, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Paul Nelson the young earth creationist.jpg

Image:Paul Nelson the young earth creationist.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Reliability of BloggingHeads

A primary source video interview with the person to whom this biographical Wikipedia entry refers is a reputable source on said person. Paul Nelson is a reputable source on Paul Nelson. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SwinginDigs (talk • contribs) 00:11, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Blogging Heads is the video equivalent of a podcast. It is not a WP:RS. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:18, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia's own guidelines: 'Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information ABOUT THEMSELVES,' Matter settled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SwinginDigs (talk • contribs) 01:10, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Creationism or philosopher?

I'm here to propose that his name should be changed to "Paul Nelson (Philosopher)" and not "Creationist". Momergil (talk) 20:01, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

He is known principally for his advocacy of creationism, therefore this would appear to be the most appropriate disambiguation of his name. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk^(P) 04:47, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Marking Nelson as (creationist) is somewhat non-standard here at Wikipedia. Look at this WP Category listing. There are about a hundred ID advocates listed and only Nelson is marked (creationist) and that really seems to stick out as non-standard, especially considering that other ID advocates on that list could be marked (creationist). How about "Paul Nelson (ID Advocate)" or (intelligent design advocate). Many prefer to refer to all ID advocates as creationists, and yes, Nelson is a creationist but throughout his career he publically advocates for Intelligent Design including via his work with the Discovery Institute, an organization that publishes interviews and the work of many non-creationists including agnostics, etc. Plus, the body of the article already adds that Nelson is a creationist. Bob Enyart, Denver KGOV radio host (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

I agree. We don’t label philosophers or scientists by their belief system. This seems like poisoning the water for any readers. Deal5710 (talk) 20:55, 30 June 2023 (UTC)

Pwning

How about we add a line such as:

In 2012 five scientists, whose names Nelson had listed to support his opposition to natural selection, each wrote responding that Nelson had misinterpreted them and that the results of their work supported evolution.

This has been picked up in a number of places, including: ScienceBlogs (in partnership with National Geographic) by JMU assoc.prof. Rosenhouse. Cesiumfrog (talk) 22:41, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Paul Nelson (creationist). 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101010060052/http://brainwaveweb.com/diavlogs/21107 to http://brainwaveweb.com/diavlogs/21107

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) 06:04, 23 March 2017 (UTC)