Talk:Humanists UK

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.

Human rights Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights 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.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Ethics / Social and political / Religion Low‑importance

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.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Low

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

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics
	Social and political philosophy
	Philosophy of religion

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Low‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	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.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

BHA (talk · contribs)
bchurchill (talk · contribs)

Distinguished supporters

What's wrong with putting the list in alphabetical order? --Dannyno 11:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I had previously left it alphabetised by surname (or by area for Lords etc.). It looks slightly more orderly now but also ends up being alphabetised according to honorific ... I'll leave it like this for now though ;) Cheers BHA 16:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now properly alphabetised! --Ant 14:02, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

What's NPOV about this article? 86.136.170.170 02:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of NPOV

I've taken the liberty of removing the NPOV tag - unless anyone can state a good reason to reinstate it, I hope that it'll remain this way. BHA 16:04, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions about this article

I have some questions about the BHA article, which seems to be a statement of the BHA's understanding of itself.

I also wonder why the controversy over the BHA MORI survey is not covered here?

I'll get a wiki account, and come back - rather than editing anonymously. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.111.168.25 (talk) 10:58, 24 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Number of members

How many members have this organization?--Vojvodae ist 15:03, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Major expansion

I have today significantly expanded this article with a new section on the History of the association and additions to the Campaigns section. I work for the BHA so I've added a "Notable Wikipedian" tag for me above; but hopefully you can see I've tried to keep well within the objectivity guidelines and focus especially on the kind of things that are likely to get asked as questions. I think this expansion is warranted in light of the increased media attention and comment the BHA is getting especially after the Atheist Bus Campaign. I agree with the earlier comment that the number of members should be included and I'll confirm and add this soon. Bchurchill (talk) 17:55, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As a BHA newbie (and trainee celebrant) I'm very pleased to see this expansion. All we need now is an article on Humanist funerals... Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:02, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Grayling

BHA members have just had email notification that Grayling is stepping aside from taking up the position of President of the BHA, because of the New College of the Humanities controversy. I've not added to the main page, because I think it might be better to wait for a more public announcement, but I thought a heads-up would be useful. --Dannyno (talk) 18:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I agree we should wait for a public announcement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:07, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

... and not an unreliable blog. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now updated per this announcement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

This article relies very heavily on sources from the BHA and has only a minor section on criticism. It does not tip over into advertising or propaganda but seems to lack a completely neutral stance. Philafrenzy (talk) 10:26, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We rely on the sources that exist. If you can find additional sources of criticism, or that take a different view from the current article, of course they can be given due weight and added accordingly. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:53, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How should the Distinguished Supporters be presented?

As part of the large swathe of edits a while back, the Distinguished Supporters list was trimmed from the list seen here, to the current single line. I reduced the section due to it being a large amount of information entirely dependent on a single primary source but another editor has raised concern for the change. Should the section be re-expanded to the previous size, stay as it is, or meet somewhere in between? I'm now undecided. Samwalton9 (talk) 16:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The problem I have with the short list is that a lot of very distinguished supporters are excluded - such as Salman Rushdie, the Kinnocks, Ken Livingstone, Terry Pratchett.... They're probably more notable at a global level than, say, Tim Minchin. I do prefer the previous list to the current version. But, I guess everyone will have their own list of "most distinguished" Distinguished Supporters, and one option would be simply to link to the BHA list. That seems a bit minimal, but on the other hand, is the fact that any of them are Distinguished Supporters a sufficiently notable fact outside the confines of the BHA itself to warrant a mention here? Another editor = Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a list of some of the distinguished supporters would make sense. For instance the page mentions that Richard Dawkins is a vice president in the caption of the photo, but there are no other mentions of other VP's anywhere. Eg Simon Blackburn's page mentions that he is also a VP, but it's not on the BHA page. There must be some sort of compromise? Gavinio (talk) 11:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The list of vice-presidents was removed in this edit. The current list is here. I'd support reinstating it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 11:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd support re-instating it. My cut-off would be anyone who has an article here, although it does seem that the overwhelming majority do. Note it seems at some point Distinguished Supporters has become Patrons. Rayman60 (talk) 16:31, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Date of commencement of Hermann Bondi's office

On his article it says 1982, on the BHA page it says 81. Both are unreferenced. Nothing on history section of BHA site. Seems previous holder left in 1980 so there wasn't an immediate succession. Minor point but obviously at least one is inaccurate. Rayman60 (talk) 16:34, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The BHA themselves say that he was President from 1982 to 1999, as does the ODNB. It may well be that his appointment was announced in 1981 but not confirmed until a formal meeting in 1982 (similar to the arrangements now in place for Shappi Khorsandi), but it seems that the most reliable sources for Bondi give 1982 as the date of commencement. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

pre-1967

The section on the history of the organisation should be expanded, or there should be a separate page for the Ethical Union. Dadge (talk) 01:06, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. A starting point might be this article, though I'm sure other good sources exist. I'd be happy to see a new article on the Union of Ethical Societies (1896-1928) which became the Ethical Union (1928-67). Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:20, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Humanists UK. 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:

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) 17:04, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Humanists UK. 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:

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) 19:05, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Humanists UK. 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:

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) 23:08, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]