User talk:~2026-23903-49
Wikipedia uses a neutral point of view: Reply
| ← Previous revision | Revision as of 23:39, 18 April 2026 | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
I reverted your edit to [[Michael Behe]] because Wikipedia uses a neutral point of view [[WP:NPOV]]. If reliable sources describe intelligent design as scientific (or even as seriously contested within science), then we can include them. But you would need to provide one. [[User:BobEret|BobEret (he/him)]] ([[User talk:BobEret|talk]]) 23:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC) |
I reverted your edit to [[Michael Behe]] because Wikipedia uses a neutral point of view [[WP:NPOV]]. If reliable sources describe intelligent design as scientific (or even as seriously contested within science), then we can include them. But you would need to provide one. [[User:BobEret|BobEret (he/him)]] ([[User talk:BobEret|talk]]) 23:09, 18 April 2026 (UTC) |
||
:Is there a source that you would consider reliable? Using the term pseudoscience is not neutral. [[Special:Contributions/~2026-23903-49|~2026-23903-49]] ([[User talk:~2026-23903-49|talk]]) 23:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC) |
|||
