Two audiences

edit

I'd like to expand our coverage of how the ID movement (1) reveals the religious nature and purpose of their approach to one audience but also (2) denies that ID is in any way religious to another audience. One place to start would be the "designer". Does intelligent design begin with a premise that life began because it was created (as in Creationism) by The Creator (as in God)? Or does it simply argue that scientific observations lead us to the logical conclusion that cells and organisms show evidence of "having been designed"?

I'd like to see a list of quotations from proponentsists (hee, hee!) acknowledging and boasting about the religious basis of ID. This would look great alongside a similar list of denials, evasions, rationalizations, etc., as they try to promote ID as properly secular and academic - having no connection to Creationism.

To ID opponents, this is all obvious, perhaps, but I'd like to make it more explicit for the reader. --Uncle Ed (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

There are plenty of sources in the articles: for example, Timeline of intelligent design may help. . .dave souza, talk 20:25, 26 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Wedge strategy. 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) 22:47, 24 May 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wedge strategy. 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) 02:26, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wedge strategy. 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) 22:35, 14 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

Socks

edit

Noting that Ethanfgrant and Cimerondagert were socks of Allenroyboy. —PaleoNeonate07:54, 28 May 2019 (UTC)Reply

Shouldn't Wedge strategy (diplomacy) be the main article?

edit

It seems weird to me that "Wedge strategy" in the Creationism debate has the main article whereas the more widely understood "Wedge strategy" from diplomacy has the (diplomacy) in parenthesis. Shouldn't it be the reverse? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I agree with you...I'm guessing that since Wedge strategy (diplomacy) is such a small and undeveloped article that that is the reason...but that doesn't mean it needs to stay that way.---Avatar317(talk) 01:52, 28 December 2021 (UTC)Reply