Talk:Project Steve
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] USAmerican?
of our nation's public schools.
The phrase refers to "our nation", but the scientists listed are from several different nations. Bobby1011 20:39, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. The list is multinational, though the statement isn't, though no doubt all the Steves mentioned would oppose the teaching of pseudoscience in any school regardless of nationality or indeed whether it was a state school. However, the US is a particular case because it's the centre of creationists' efforst and it also has the little problem of the establishment clause. The NCSE is an American organisation. btw, they also failed to mention religiopseudoscientific explanations for geology and cosmology in the text, but no doubt the Steves would oppose that too. — Dunc|☺ 21:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Parody? Not at all
Project Steve is a request to an authority (scientists), and is embodied by a document written for an audience of officials (school boards) as well as the general public and signed by numerous individuals, which according to Wiki is the definition of a petition. What Project Steve is *not* is a form of satire that imitates another work of art in order to ridicule or poke affectionate fun at either the work itself, or the subject of the work, which according to Wiki is the definition of a parody. Project Steve does not imitate nor does it attempt to satirize the subject of its petition, but rather it provides a serious rebuttal to it through a petition. Therefore Project Steve is not a parody but is rather a petition drive. This should be reflected in the article, so I have removed the word parody from Project Steve. Look at FSM and IPU - they are parodies, but Project Steve - despite it's "hip" title - is *not* a parody by its very definition. The use of the word parody in this article is contextual as a pejorative and as such is not in the spirit of Wiki. It should be removed...and so I have. We can not asperse an article with pejorative rhetoric just because we don't agree with it's subject matter. To do so is POV and is not what Wiki is about. Cheers, Astrobayes 09:23, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
- It is a parody. What other reason could there be for limiting the right to sign it to people named Steve? The point of the parody is to show that although creationists have been able to round up a number of scientists willing to state they have issues with evolution, there are a greater number of scientists, by a tremendous amount, who have no such issues. There are so many people who favour evolution, in fact, that there are a greater number of 'scientists named Steve who support evolution' than there are 'scientists who no not support evolution'.
- Project Steve does in fact ridicule something: the creationist petition. It is to be taken serious, as Flying Spaghetti Momsterism is, but it is not a serious rebuttal. It is tongue in cheek. -- Ec5618 09:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- I'll say it again, that "Project Steve is a request to an authority (scientists), and is embodied by a document written for an audience of officials (school boards) as well as the general public and signed by numerous individuals, which according to Wiki is the definition of a petition," as I've stated above. Where is the verifiable source you're using to say it is a parody? By the very definition of a petition as given in Wiki, P.S. is a petition drive. I'll agree that P.S. imitates the creationist's petition drive , but the statement that drives P.S. is not satirical. It's a very serious statement. However, this may be splitting hairs and Project Steve stands on its own merit so I'm going to just let this go - there are bigger problems in Wiki to solve. :D Perhaps I'll come back to this article another time. Astrobayes 04:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- They're not using the word parody but in response to the Q "is this some kind of joke" they say: 'Yes and no', 'in a lighthearted manner' and '[we realize] that science is not conducted by voting'.
- I'ld say that fits well enough in the wikipedia definition of parody.
- Your "verifiabe source": the FAQ of the project itself (http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/5945_the_faqs_2_16_2003.asp)! Arakrys 213.84.114.40 07:59, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Bart says: "Hawking's cool!"
- Stephen Hawking (who, like Gould, is so eminent that he has appeared on The Simpsons)
Oh, please people – so references in popular culture are the measure of a scientist? – Tintazul msg 23:31, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Added a "See Also" section
I'm not completely sure how appropriate my addition of Flying Spaghetti Monster was to the list, but the lightharded critisism of intelligent design/creationism is there, so I figured it counted as a similar vein. If my referencing it is POV or otherwise problematic, though, feel free to remove it. IMFromKathlene 06:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Simpsons opinion
"Stephen Hawking (who, like Gould, is so eminent that he has appeared on The Simpsons [3])"
Although I agree both Hawkings and Gould are eminent, I don't think it is the place of an encyclopedia to make the assertion that their eminence is the causal effect to being featured in the simpsons. Also, this quote is more fitting of a profile of Gould, not project steve.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.181.138.113 (talk • contribs) 03:57, 4 February 2007.
- Ok I edited it slightly. I did not write this, and it is not particularly encyclopedic, but it is a slightly wry nugget. Perhaps we should remove it, however. I know you think we are mocking Project Steve, but lets face it: Project Steve is already sort of tongue-in-cheek, no?--Filll 04:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- We are dead serious! And I want to be on the Simpsons, too! --Stephan Schulz 07:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
