Talk:Atheism Conquered

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

Atheism Low‑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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-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.

Untitled

Most of this article is a copy-paste from Inquisition. And the only original part at the begginning has an inappropiate style for wikipedia. -- Fernando Estel ☆ · 星 ^{(Talk: here- commons- es)} 14:45, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but as I looked up this article from reading Robert Greene's book, perhaps Tommaso's greatest claim to fame in the english speaking world is now this reference Zfishwiki (talk) 19:50, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But the article barely mentions the book, and focuses on the various inquisitions instead. Articles should remain mostly on-topic, and content on other topics belong in their own articles, and can be linked to if necessary. I came to this article looking for information on the content and arguments of that book, and found nothing of value here. Whether that reference is Tommaso's greatest claim to fame or not has nothing to do with the almost completely off-topic nature of this article on that book. -- Hi Ev 02:15, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

".... a book attacking free-thinkers, Machiavellians, Calvinists, and heretics of all stripes." This article is very good yoke! Are anyone read what Robert Greene realy writen in his "The 48 Laws of Power"?--Ivo Vahur (talk) 06:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He does say that but also goes on to explain that it is really cover for his true ideals. Rather than publish a book where he expresses his inflammatory views (see what happened last time) he made it a series of arguments in which the catholic side ostensibly won but where the "free thinker" arguments are expressed so well that it became a sort of free thinker handbook. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.66.35.230 (talk) 16:49, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]