Talk:McLean v. Arkansas Board of Education

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

This Creationism related article has been awarded SILVER status for quality. We like it, and you should too! See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.


As soon as I get a quick proofread for typos done I will return the bronze, this deserves at least that. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:52, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

As I read, I am convinced that after cleaning up the odd typos, this should be gold. That needs input from others though. ħumanUser talk:Human 07:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
I don't know who kept re-bronzing this and ignoring my comments, but at my current point in reading and fixing typos (which seem to be vanishingly small by the middle of the article), I am convinced that this is at least silver material. Probably gold, but that takes, as I said above, input of others. It's a long read, but with the typos gone you can just skim if you want. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
You see that button that says Fossil record..? Mark Antony (talk) 08:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Yes, and I don't know who you are or why you were doing it. ħumanUser talk:Human 08:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)


So, bronze or silver? Arguments please. Real first name and last initialTalk, talk, talk skim my contributions 12:41, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

  • Article topic is directly relevant to and worthy of RW's mission (i.e., potential upgrading to cover story would be uncontroversial). - CHECK!
  • Article should not contain repetitive content or contain repetitive content or repetitive content. - CHECK! CHECK! CHECK!
  • Article is almost fully referenced with appropriate internal and external links, and categories. - not quite there yet.
  • Article is illustrated appropriately. - Nothing as of right now.
  • Article is free of blatant speling and grammar error's. - CZECH!

So in may estimation it's not quite silver material yet. I also find it over-wordy, with stuff about who the attorneys were etc, which adds content but not especially useful content. OK that last bit isn't in the criteria for a silver rating but I thought it worth mentioning. Real first name and last initialTalk, talk, talk skim my contributions 12:51, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I am totally for golding this. It is an astounding wonderful article now that some typos are fixed. All we have to do is write a synopsis. I note someone put it back to bronze. It is silver no doubt. Are there any things lacking to make it gold? ħumanUser talk:Human 07:36, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
Three years late, and I'm a newbie here, but I would like to see some more information regarding the missing defendants' transcripts. Why are they missing, how was it discovered they were missing, etc. At the very least an in-line reference about them where we could go for more info on the subject. Thanos6 (talk) 06:48, 9 July 2014 (UTC)