The Creation Wiki is made available by the NW Creation Network
Watch monthly live webcast - Like us on Facebook - Subscribe on YouTube

Talk:Barack Obama

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to: navigation, search

why is this here?

Has Mr. Obama done anything significant in, or impacting, the field of creation science? If not, I don't see what purpose there is having this article here. ⇔ ChristTrekker 05:56, 19 October 2011 (PDT)

You can't just use a subjective opinion and not provide any reasons. Talk pages are not for such things. If you have a problem with the article as a whole, go through the appropriate channels.--Tsommer (Tony) 09:48, 19 October 2011 (PDT)
Tony, that is an exceptionally rude response. He did provide a reason: he doesn't see any relation to the primary purpose of the wiki. The appropriate response for him is to ask if there's a relationship he doesn't see. This talk page is exactly "the appropriate channel" to raise such questions; that's what talk pages are for. ~ "Webster" Otley (talk) 19:05, 22 October 2011 (PDT)
What are those "appropriate channels"? I couldn't find anything related to CreationWiki:Policy that defines what may or may not be covered here, nor how to address that concern. Therefore the only "reason" I have is common sense: it seems reasonable to me that I can question the presence of a biographical article about someone that has nothing to do with the stated purpose of the wiki. (Beyond stating that he is, most likely, not a creationist himself, what else would be in scope and not already done better elsewhere?) Not given any other guidance, the talk page of the article in question seems the most logical place to bring it up. ⇔ ChristTrekker 12:38, 19 October 2011 (PDT)
Try here: -OR- if that doesn't work you could try addressing it to the Sr. Editor Ashcraft, he can make the decision you are looking for I would think. And I would say, yes Barack Obama is a creationist. But I can't wait personally to see more of your contributions. Take care.--Tsommer (Tony) 12:43, 19 October 2011 (PDT)
The deletion recommendation page is not for asking questions, it's for proposing action, after one is convinced a page needs to be deleted. And going to Mr. Ashcraft as a first resort is also inappropriate -- that's for appeals, when we have been unable to resolve issues without him.
I suggest you do a little research on Mr. Obama before you make silly claims, such as that he is a creationist. At best, he is a theistic evolutionist, possibly with a little day-ageism mixed in.
I do agree with you in one thing, however: I am also looking forward to more from ChristTrekker. ~ "Webster" Otley (talk) 19:05, 22 October 2011 (PDT)
I know its for action, thats why I posed the link. And I didn't say to go to Ashcraft as a first resort, please read it more carefully. Theistic evolutionist is a type of creationist.--Tsommer (Tony) 19:08, 22 October 2011 (PDT)
But he was asking a question, not proposing action. So using the deletion recommendation page would have been grossly premature. It would therefore be prudent to conclude that "that doesn't work," triggering your recommendation to address the Senior Editor. And since following your advice would lead him to Mr. Ashcraft before anything else, then yes, you were saying to go to him first. The fact that you listed it second is irrelevant when the first suggestion on your list doesn't make sense.
Whether a theistic evolutionist is to be considered a "creationist" is debatable, but in any case, the article had not established even that when we started this conversation. ~ Webster (talk) 09:46, 25 August 2012 (PDT)

So... anybody been able to come up with a reason to post this article (and related articles) here on CreationWiki? It's been nearly three years, and I haven't seen anything, yet. ~ Webster (talk) 21:11, 10 August 2014 (EDT)


Let me know if anyone is interested in creating subpages for some of the subsections in the 1996-2003 section, I realize they are starting to get a bit lengthy. I'm fine with moving some of the material into subpages and just summarizing it here so if anyone else is likeminded feel free to do so. --Jzyehoshua 14:01, 28 April 2012 (PDT)

There's no need to go into enough detail to require subpages unless the subjects relate to this wiki's purpose. General political information should probably be moved to Conservapedia. ~ Webster (talk) 09:51, 25 August 2012 (PDT)


I tend to know more about the controversies surrounding Obama, particularly those in major elections but I realize more needs to be reported on the major events during his terms, so if anyone has any contributions for the page I'd love to hear them. I did a lot of new research on his background to try and flesh out a good starting biography section with more general information about his life. Anyway, if anybody has recommendations for content and sourcing by all means bring them to the table; as I'd like this article to be balanced. I've always focused a lot on the Born Alive controversy surrounding him primarily, so it's what I know most about. I may need to move some of the detail here to a Born Alive controversy page at some point and just summarize it a bit more here, but it has nevertheless been very prominent since 2004 in the news, as should be evident. --Jzyehoshua 03:15, 5 May 2012 (PDT)

I've just started a new article at Obama born alive controversy to begin moving extra detail to, so this page can just summarize the information on the Born Alive issue more, and prove more biographical in nature. --Jzyehoshua 05:05, 5 May 2012 (PDT)

Well, it's not perfect, but at least it's not blatantly biased like the Wikipedia page on Obama, which refuses to mention anything more controversial than his high school drug use. I honestly think Obama has his campaign staffers controlling the page, because it might as well be a promotional billboard for him. Not a word on the page of any real controversy. I tried years ago to get even a few lines mentioned about the controversies surrounding him and saw first-hand how biased they are there, even when multiple editors are supportive of mentioning controversy. The Born Alive controversy played a major role now in 3 different elections for Obama, and they don't even mention it in a single sentence.

Anyway, I still need to summarize some sections, I'm trying to keep each election section shorter and use more subpages, but at least the article is portraying major info about his life and background now that has been covered up from the American people (including by Wikipedia). I'm almost ready to start covering the presidential period now. I work M-Th though, 40 hours a week, so I probably won't get to it until next week, however. --Jzyehoshua 13:34, 6 May 2012 (PDT)


Thanks for resizing the images Ashcraft, I don't work much with images and just write content for the most part. I'm not that familiar with policy or formatting apart from content-writing and haven't included images in wikis much before. I'm perfectly happy to have someone else work on the images at this page, they're not exactly my forte. --Jzyehoshua 21:10, 6 May 2012 (PDT)


Looks like I'll need to shorten the 2010 healthcare section. I think I'll write it first, then just move it into a subpage somewhere, but it's getting too lengthy. --Jzyehoshua 12:16, 19 May 2012 (PDT)

This was something I researched extensively for my 2010 ebook, The Zambrano Report, so I have a lot of sources and points to make on this subject. Trying to keep the whole thing concise is proving difficult. --Jzyehoshua 12:18, 19 May 2012 (PDT)