Talk:Johan's Ark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Please Expand 2 Link to Dutch Wikipedia Article 3 Ark van Johan/Johan's Ark 4 Not a ship 5 Don't make up rules as you go along. Follow the Guidelines 5.1 Do something useful for a change 6 Pat Robertson & CBN

[edit] Please Expand

Apologies for this rather sub standard article, it is my first and I don't really know much about the subject. I just saw an article about it on the BBC and was rather dismayed there was no article about it on Wikipedia.

I would be grateful for anyone who adds details about it as it seems a rather interesting subject. Caffm8 14:08, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Is it actually all wood, or does it have a steel hull with wood cladding? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by PiCo (talk • contribs) 01:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC).

The black thing in the water is a steel hull; the Ark on top is all wood. Ceinturion 06:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link to Dutch Wikipedia Article

nl:Ark van Johan Caffm8 16:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ark van Johan/Johan's Ark

Hi Caffm8, great idea to start this article in the English Wikipedia. I am glad you found the panorama picture useful. I was wondering if you had considered already changing the name to Johan's Ark, because that's closer to Noah's Ark. In Dutch it came to be called Ark van Johan because that's close to Ark van Noach. Ceinturion 21:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I've moved the page since it is policy to use English names even though I am not entirely convinced. When things are named by their creator it feels right to leave them as is IMHO. Caffm8 21:35, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, he is not so vain to call it Ark van Johan. For him it is humbly Ark, or Ark van Noach. Ceinturion 06:54, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Not a ship

If it has to be floated around on pontoons it is clearly not a ship. I changed the word to "vessel", which is what the original Ark is called in its article. Steve Dufour 12:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't make up rules as you go along. Follow the Guidelines

Who exactly are you to make up new, unheard of rules and guidelines and insist that we follow them? I am talking about rules you just made up yourself like "External links do not count" for establishing notability, and this gem: "External links are not references". External links are not references?? Huh?? How ridiculous! These made-up rules and snobbish pretensions that the subject is not notable enough for you personally, are merely masks for your underlying hostility to the subject and your desire to prevent readers from accessing this notable information on Wikipedia that they can easily find elsewhere. Maybe the best page for you to read is WP:DICK. Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 16:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Do something useful for a change

No, external links are not references. References are things that let you verify the contents of an article. Dumping a bunch of links into the 'External Links' section of an article is about as useful as tits on a bull. It isn't until somebody, like maybe .... ME, comes along and actually turns these links into citations, and modifies the article where they don't match the sources, that they become in any way useful. So I would suggest that you (1) read WP:DICK yourself & (2) actually do something to improve an article instead of jumping up and down on those who are actually attempting to do a bit of quality control (and improvement). Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 14:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pat Robertson & CBN

Before whining about my characterisation of Pat Robertson, I suggest you read Pat Robertson controversies. People who advocate the assassination of foreign leaders & 'prophesy' natural disasters for towns who vote against their wishes can reasonably be characterised as "nutcases".

On Christian Broadcasting Network, I refer you to the article which states:

Originally a full fledged network, CBN was later renamed The Family Channel. Eventually "FAM" was sold to Fox and known as the "Fox Family Channel". Fox later sold it to Disney, which renamed it "ABC Family". CBN exists now as a production company for The 700 Club, and the other syndicated shows CBN NewsWatch, Christian World News, Living the Life, and One Cubed.

On top of it being a mere "production company", CBN is often cited for its extreme conservative Christian bias, bringing it under WP:V#Questionable sources. Hrafn^Talk_Stalk 14:08, 17 February 2008 (UTC)