We can quote autobiographies in terms of what the deity has to say about themselves. It's a primary source, not original research when quoted.? Only original in the first-form. That is, we can't publish it by itself, but we can quote it, with other sources.
Or it's true, which would mean that it was dictated by God himself. Wouldn't that make it original research?
-----Original Message----- From: Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com To: English Wikipedia wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Sent: Mon, Jul 6, 2009 2:40 pm Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] Bible websites
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 6:52 PM, stevertigostvrtg@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Charles Matthewscharles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com wrote:
On the other hand, why is a Wikipedia article citing a Bible verse?
Because in spite of their dominant representation, its the Wikipedia and not the Atheistpedia.
Come to think of it:
The bible is either wrong, in which case it shouldn't be cited.
Or it's true, which would mean that it was dictated by God himself. Wouldn't that make it original research?
/me ducks
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l