Talk:A Beka Books
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page has been written with a left-wing thinking and therefore is not neutral.
My name is Carl, and I am the one who added the supposed "left wing" bit to the article. I am a tenth grader currently enrolled in the A Beka Curriculum, and I can say that everything I wrote is completely true. I am not out to "get" A Beka or anything like that, just inform people how biased they are. I am a Christian, and I also believe in evolution. I dont believe they contradict each other. I also don't have anything against conservatives, or the Republican Party, but I just dont like Biases towards them in Schoolbooks. A Beka is DEFINITELY BIASED towards the Republican party, if you dont believe me, just check out their tenth grade history book.
- It may have been your intention to merely inform people, which is good, but the content reads as very biased. It will need some rewriting to maintain a NPOV. Mgroop 12:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I believe this article should be merged with Pensacola Christian College, as they are closely associated with the college. Also I bring to attention Bob Jones University Press, which is as large if not larger than A Beka Books, it is part of Bob Jones UniversityMgroop 12:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Support merge I agree this is notable or long enough for its own. Arbusto 23:35, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
- Support merge The "A Beka" article doesn't say anything that couldn't be said in a paragraph on the PCC page. --John Foxe 20:01, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Don't merge The college may produce the textbooks, but the two are not the same thing. I also think this page is biased and more of a slam on PCC. Also, more facts would be nice. While I'm at it, may I point out the logical error of assuming evoloution to be true. It's called the Theory of Evoloution for a reason. Also, why is that half the article? How about a section on the phonics system based on Ben Franklins Blue Backed Speller? That's encyclopedia information there. --209.242.224.138 00:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
- Don't merge Plain and simple "A Beka Books" can be likened to any other College publishing company. Which have an individual page for the publishing company. --MJHankel 02:14, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- "Like" in what sense? The school its connected to is unaccredited whereas other university presses are internationally respected and are peer reviewed within the academic community. This publisher simply isn't notable, which is why the article is so small and hasn't grown. If you can expand it then I will reconsider my vote. Arbusto 02:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
- I would dispute your assertion. A Beka Books is on the same level as Bob Jones University Press, which didn't have an article until October 7, when you copied the information from Bob Jones University in order to create a new article. Both are better served by being part of their parent organization's article. Mgroop 20:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support merge. There is too little info available info the subject to merit an article. -Will Beback 18:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- To recap we have one IP and one person who longer contributes to wikipedia who are against the merge, and three for it. Arbusto 16:57, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Criticism should be sourced
I used mostly A Beka textbooks when I was homeschooled and can confirm most of the points brought up in the criticism, but it is important that those points be sourced. If we do not cite a variety of sources, then the section looks like one person's just complaining about A Beka. --Idont Havaname (Talk) 14:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
