Talk:A Rough History of Disbelief

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the A Rough History of Disbelief article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

BBC Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject BBC, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the BBC. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join us as a member. You can also visit the BBC Portal.BBCWikipedia:WikiProject BBCTemplate:WikiProject BBCBBC articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tasks for WikiProject BBC:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Improve BBC, BBC News (TV channel) and BBC News to Good Article status following previous reviews, create BBC Computer Literacy Project (in light of forthcoming 30th anniversary)
Cleanup : Chucklevision - references and general clean-up, Pebble Mill Studios - over-detailed and long, BBC World Service Television - unreferenced and confusing
Copyedit : BBC News, Broadcasting House
Expand : Top 20 start-class BBC articles with most importance: BBC Japan, BBC World Service Television, BBC Lifestyle, BBC Two Northern Ireland
NPOV : Criticism of the BBC (See comments)
Stubs : Stub-Class BBC articles
Other : *Restructure the category
- Add infoboxes to the BBC articles without infoboxes
- Add free-use images to biographical articles where possible
- Add references to Goa Mix (see assessment) and Coat of arms of the BBC
- Return Dad's Army to a Good article. (See comments)
- Reassess BBC following improvements to article.

Atheism Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism 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.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.

Quick help

Recent activity

To do

Join WikiProject atheism and be bold.

Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members.
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt-an-article.
Help out with this to-do list.

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles).
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.

Maintenance, etc.

Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references).
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly.
Always write for an encyclopedia.

Articles to improve

Agnosticism

Create

Articles on notable atheists

Expand

an atheism stub

Immediate attention

State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes.
Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Current state[edit]

I removed the sentence that appeared to be theistic apology or accuse Miller of same. I saw the entirety of the series parts of it more than once. I removed an expand tag which was certainly justified as the text that's there was a complete distortion. The main framework of the series is in fact the historical development of European atheism that more or less ends with d'Holbach (in Miller's presentation), IIRC. The sentence I introduced attempts to restore that factual focus, a recounting of the content proportional to the time spent on different thinkers will make this clear. I think there was something at the end where Miller looked at rational apologists but it didn't match the sentence I removed. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 14:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've got the DVDs at home, but it is something that he brought up when sitting in the library, cutting away from Colin McGinn. It's certainly not theistic apologetic: he's saying that theists ask that you have faith, but it's extremely difficult if not impossible to do will oneself into believing without reasons or what not. It's not theistic apologetic, it's simply an issue in philosophy that Miller touched on in the programme. There is, of course, a sourcing issue - it's on TV, and I'd have to go find the minutes and seconds and all that. I can do so if required, but it might take a few days. —Tom Morris (talk) 14:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the current bias which my addition doesn't really fully address that might be the best thing. In doing so you will be able to refresh your memory and place it in an accurately reported context. Recounting the specific mark in the episode isn't necessary but accuracy in prose is. The fact tag can be addressed by either correct inline prose or a footnote. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 14:49, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the failure of understanding that has caused you to use "voluntarily" is known to me. As you appear to have staked this out I'll leave it to you, Tom Morris, to address it, as you've stated above you would do. 72.228.177.92 (talk) 01:52, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]