RationalWiki's 2018 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3383Goal: $5000

Talk:Brian Thomas

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon creationism.svg

This Creationists related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.



Look, I'm sorry, but the term DpSU was coined by EyeonICR, and I really don't see why it should be used as an any kind of official term in this article. ThunderkatzHo! 04:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Seems kind of annoying and useless to keep repeating the whole term. What about "we'll call them DPSUs for short"? Plus, we have all kinds of snarky redefinitions on the site anyway -- unless you want me to rewrite all my references to Anthony Watts' blog as LOLWUWT and Steve McIntyre's as "Climate Fraudit." Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 04:55, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
It is mostly used as DpSU in the article. I guess my main problem is, while with Watts and McIntyre it seems pretty clear that we made it up for the article, here we seem to be using it like it's something more than one person's creation. Maybe we just need to change the sentence that introduces the term? ThunderkatzHo! 05:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Eh, it seems fine to me, it's footnoted to say it was made up by the author of the article. Nebuchadnezzar (talk) 05:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
If you have a better way of referring to them, you can use it (provided that it's consistent throughout)... (With regards to the other header, I hadn't realised that the convention of only capitalising the first letter of articles extended to headers within them) Eye on the ICR talk, or type, or whatever... 06:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)