Talk:United Coalition of Reason

Atheism Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Atheism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of atheism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AtheismWikipedia:WikiProject AtheismTemplate:WikiProject AtheismAtheism articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

For more information and how you can help, click the [Show] link opposite:

If you would like to participate, you can edit this article and visit the project page.

Quick help

Recent activity

To do

Join WikiProject atheism and be bold.

Add a userbox to your page ({{User WikiProject Atheism}} or {{User WPA2}}) and attract potential members.
Help with articles.
See this month's adopt-an-article.
Help out with this to-do list.

Be consistent

Use a "standard" layout for atheism-related articles (see layout style, "The perfect article" and Featured articles).
Add Atheism info box to all atheism related talk pages (use {{WikiProject Atheism}} or see info box)
Ensure atheism-related articles are members of Atheism by checking whether [[Category:Atheism]] has been added to atheism-related articles – and, where it hasn't, adding it.

Maintenance, etc.

Find sources for all positions of an article (see Citing sources and atheism references).
Try to expand stubs. Ideas and theories about life, however, are prone to generating neologisms, so some stubs may be suitable for deletion (see deletion process).
Watch the list of atheism-related articles and add to accordingly.
Always write for an encyclopedia.

Articles to improve

Agnosticism

Create

Articles on notable atheists

Expand

an atheism stub

Immediate attention

State atheism needs a reassessment of its Importance level, as it has little to do with atheism and is instead an article about anti-theist/anti-religious actions of governments.
False choice into False dilemma: discuss whether you are for or against this merge here
Clarify references in Atheism using footnotes.
Secular movement defines it as a being restricted to America in the 21st century.

Notability

All of the "references" are about the advertisement they purchased. This is in vio of Wikipedia:Notability#SPIP, if there are reliable sources that document this groups notability otherwise please provide them. Tstrobaugh (talk) 21:10, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The organization is relatively new (founded in 2009) and there are not as many articles about them compared to American Atheists, but the NY Times reference (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/27/us/27atheist.htm?_r=2) and the one I just added (http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/culture/37-history/3579-progressives-attempt-to-make-church-and-state-one-in-the-same) clearly mention the organization (absent of its advertising campaign). I don't know why you seem to be singling out this article from List of secularist organizations#United_States when there are others such as The Humanist Institute or The Atheist Agenda that have fewer and even no references. TimeClock871 (talk) 06:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The first one (NyT) has the same problem of being about the advertisement, the second source is not a reliable news source. I'll get to the others when I can, you could help. I'm not trying to delete these articles, leave the tag up until they are improved (by consensus). Tstrobaugh (talk) 19:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see. That's a good idea. I misunderstood your actions. Sorry. TimeClock871 (talk) 00:17, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What you seem to be failing to note about purchased advertising is that this advertising has generated significant media attention across the United States and overseas. I just added some media coverage references in the history section that allude to or demonstrate this. But there are many, many more that could be added. One of this organization's main activities is to use advertising to generate media attention and wide public interest. By this means the organization has become publicly significant because of the controversy and discussion it has created. A useful parallel here would be the Atheist Bus Campaign in Britain, which is also about advertising that has created buzz. 69.140.42.6 (talk) 22:33, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Since there have been no further comments on the notability question in three months, and no challenge to the last comment, I'm removing the notability banner. 69.140.42.6 (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy. Local news media mentioning a couple recent local billboards (Nove/Dec 2011) http://www.cfpmidweek.com/weeks/IssuePDFs/vo9i24web.pdf

To access you MAY have to go to the Web site's archive page via the main Web site page and smack the Nov. 30 - Dec. 13, 2011 offering.

The Springfield, MO locale is within the Bible Belt and chock-full of well-indoctrinated simple-minded folk who obviously have shunned any non-religious education, at least as much as possible and I AM refraining from my general lack of religious indoctrination as possible. Suffice it to proclaim that non-fiction reading of ANY subject is looked askance at and I fear a large percentage of the locals never advance much past the "See Spot run" level of reading. Obbop (talk) 17:21, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on United Coalition of Reason. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:51, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPOV

Hi, if anyone would like to edit this article, it seems to heavily and uncritically draw from information directly from the subject organization. Zorblin (talk) 22:29, 27 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]