Talk:Robert Todd Carroll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
 
WikiProject Skepticism (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Misc[edit]

I cleaned it up a bit. But do we have any evidence to suggest that the Skeptic's Dictionary began with exactly 50 articles? Zensufi 00:14, 21 April 2005 (UTC)

importance[edit]

I think this article is important. Go to "what links here" and you will find quite a few articles that link to this one. Bubba73 (talk), 23:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the {{importance}} tag added without explanation by User:24.55.47.135. The article already asserts the important of Carroll, specifically that he is a published author and has a well-known, well-visited website on skepticism. This gives lie to the claim that it "lacks information on the importance of the subject matter". On the other hand, it could use more material and better sourcing. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
while I agree that the subject is notable enough for an article. The article itself needs work, and references to something other than the subjects work. --Rocksanddirt 16:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC) In fact the Afd for this article back in feb had a number of good refs. that don't seem to be included.....? --Rocksanddirt 16:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

NPOV?[edit]

This article reads like something you'd see on his website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.15.250.226 (talk) 23:18, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, this is lacking third-party sources that are more than interviews with the author. Most sources appear to be self-promotion. Does not even describe what "skeptics societies" are about or why we should care.--Parkwells (talk) 18:07, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
It's difficult to understand what the complaint is. If you don't know what "skeptics societies" means, then you wont be able to understand what the article is about. Paul B (talk) 17:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Carroll's views have attracted numerous interviews for him from mainstream media[citation needed][edit]

I'm not sure that the statement that currently says "Carroll's views have attracted numerous interviews for him from mainstream media" is correct. I did find one article from the New York Times which has several quotes from him [1] but one article does not constitute "numerous". If other people can't find more cites, we should probably rephrase the sentence. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 20:07, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

"Longtime advocate of atheism", Cat:Atheist philosophers, Cat:American atheists[edit]

Is Carroll an atheist? I can't find anything about either advocacy of atheism or personal belief in it in his autobiographical sketch or the atheism page at http://www.skepdic.com/. Indeed, the skepdic.com atheist page sounds, to me, more as if he would not describe himself as an atheist. I haven't had time to research his writings in depth, but I suggest that is up to the editors who want these claims in the article, rather than to me. Meanwhile, since this falls under the WP:BLP policy, I have removed his supposed advocacy of atheism, and the categories "Atheist philosophers" and "American atheists". Feel free to reinsert these things if you can provide a reference to a reliable source. But please note that "atheist" categories are reserved for people "for whom their atheism was or is a defining characteristic or related to their notability and who have self-identified as atheists".[2] (Similar limitations apply to other religious categories.) Bishonen | talk 16:19, 8 September 2012 (UTC).

P.S. I've found a modest reference for Carroll being personally an atheist (at least in 1996) in the Skeptic's Dictionary article, namely this "personal profile" from Who's Who Online, 1996. It's obviously not sufficient for the things I've removed, though: no "advocacy", no relation to his notability. Bishonen | talk 19:34, 8 September 2012 (UTC).