[WikiEN-l] Worrying trends

Fri Jul 22 21:46:15 UTC 2005

Well, we will find out. I have just edited this article, noting that  
no historical evidence exists other than the Book of Mormon. My  
cousins can revert me, if they dare... Or come up with some evidence.  
Maybe a few gold coins with Nephi's visage...

Fred

On Jul 22, 2005, at 12:33 PM, Erik Moeller wrote:

> Delirium:
>
>> I don't see a problem with that article.  What else is there to  
>> say about it?  The Book of Mormon claims something about a person  
>> named "Nephi", and we report "the Book of Mormon claims the  
>> following about Nephi".  Do we need to explicitly say "however,  
>> people who think the Book of Mormon is mostly hogwash think this  
>> claim is also hogwash"?
>>
>
> The Book of Mormon is different from, say, ''Star Wars: Revenge of  
> the Sith'', in one important respect: People believe that it  
> records historical facts. This also distinguishes it from ancient  
> mythologies that are no longer believed. Furthermore, many of these  
> factual claims are not, on their face, absurd: There are many  
> ancient tribes about whom we know little, and the discovery of new  
> ancient cultures is a real possibility.
>
> When someone makes a claim about a clearly fictional universe,  
> that's fine, and an initial establishment of context is sufficient.  
> When they make claims, based on their scripture, about reality,  
> then these claims deserve to be challenged. We challenge a 19th- 
> century healing mythology like homeopathy with facts, so we should  
> equally challenge the Mormon belief system, where it is not mere  
> theology, with facts.
>
> A Mormon who wants to know: Did Nephi exist? Did the Jaredites  
> really live? - will not find answers in Wikipedia. Instead, they  
> will find what they already know: official church doctrine, and  
> perhaps some other LDS-related beliefs as in:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaredite
>
> Wikipedia's mission is not "free storage space for all belief  
> systems", but "free knowledge for all." Another problem with http:// 
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nephi , more than the first paragraph, is the  
> second one, which goes on:
>
> "Another Nephi lived around the time of Christ, and he was a  
> descendant of Lehi as well. This Nephi was the son of Helaman.  
> Nephi also had a son who was called Nephi after him."
>
> The context "Book of Mormon" is easily lost once established.
>
> An NPOV article
> - makes sure that the context is clear at any given point
> - balances claims about historical reality which are believed by  
> many with scientific knowledge.
>
> So yes, a statement like "These claims are not accepted by  
> historians of the period" is generally necessary in these articles,  
> but it would almost certainly be reverted immediately by  
> Wikipedia's Mormon congregation.
>
> Erik
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l at Wikipedia.org
> http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
>