User:Starbuck

I'm not here to challenge anyone's beliefs. I love debate, but only in the appropriate fora with willing opponents, and I fully realize that CreationWiki does not meet that criteria. I come in peace :)

I came because I was searching for the Islamic version of creation. The article seemed a little off, so I looked at the reference list. There were several references from anti-Islamic websites used to describe basic Islamic beliefs, and the rest were questionable.

My concern is that bad information will be inadvertently used in your articles, which misinforms inattentive internet surfers who might think that this is Wikipedia (you're internet users, you know the people I'm talking about). The lack of standards for reference sources also reflects poorly on CreationWiki. A large portion of the population double-checks Wikipedia's information by verifying the source material (I just skim the article, find what I'm interested in, and go to the source associated with it).

This site would be perceived as a more reliable source of information if it adopted Wikipedia's stringent criteria for references. The major criticism of YEC right now is over scientific validity, and using less than academic standards for your articles strengthens that argument. Don't give that to them.

We may be at odds regarding creation-evolution but, from what I've seen on the discussion pages, we both value fairness. That is where I'm coming from, not as an opponent, but as someone who values fair play.

Take Care,

Anne

This user may edit (and create) Talk pages only, and may not upload images.