Talk:Robert Todd Carroll

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Robert Todd Carroll article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is being improved by WikiProject Rational Skepticism. Wikiproject Rational Skepticism seeks to improve the quality of articles dealing with science, pseudosciences, pseudohistory and skepticism. Please feel free to help us improve this page. See Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

This article was nominated for deletion on 8 February 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Misc

I cleaned it up a bit. But do we have any evidence to suggest that the Skeptic's Dictionary began with exactly 50 articles? Zensufi 00:14, 21 April 2005 (UTC)

[edit] importance

I think this article is important. Go to "what links here" and you will find quite a few articles that link to this one. Bubba73 (talk), 23:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the {{importance}} tag added without explanation by User:24.55.47.135. The article already asserts the important of Carroll, specifically that he is a published author and has a well-known, well-visited website on skepticism. This gives lie to the claim that it "lacks information on the importance of the subject matter". On the other hand, it could use more material and better sourcing. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:33, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

while I agree that the subject is notable enough for an article. The article itself needs work, and references to something other than the subjects work. --Rocksanddirt 16:56, 23 October 2007 (UTC) In fact the Afd for this article back in feb had a number of good refs. that don't seem to be included.....? --Rocksanddirt 16:57, 23 October 2007 (UTC)