Talk:Ignatius L. Donnelly
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ignatius L. Donnelly article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
[edit]You don't need to refer to him as a "quack" and "charlatan". His ideas may have not been accepted by the mainstream archaeological community or not based on actual facts, but there's no need to bring such language into the article. --Revolución talk 00:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
A date problem
[edit]There is a contradiction in this article:
"Ignatius Loyola Donnelly (November 3, 1831–January 1, 1901) was a U.S. Congressman ... Donnelly was the son of an Irish immigrant, Philip Carrol Donnelly who had settled in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. On June 29, 1826 he married Catherine Gavin, a 2nd generation American of Irish extraction."
This means he married 4 years before he was born.
Harry Fisher
Los Angeles —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.75.79.141 (talk) 04:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
- The "he" in your second quoted sentence refers to Philip C. Donnelly, Iggy's dad. It could be phrased more clearly, but it's not that hard to understand. Idontcareanymore (talk) 08:46, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
In the lead sentence he is a populist writer but rest of the lead paragraph only itemizes work for which he is known that can only be called popular, not populist. One sentence about the populist is needed. And then the itemization should use the work popular in order to make the cute point. --P64 (talk) 22:09, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Pseudoscience?
[edit]Although ID's archaeological theories have been shown to be wrong, is it correct to call them pseudoscience? Robert V. Davis Jr., in writing about ID, notes that, "... it provides an example of the difficulty, except in retrospect, of distinguishing science from myth. ... in the latter half of the nineteenth century, reputable scientists could make a case based on acceptable data and methodologies that not only did Atlantis exist, but that it was also a prime candidate for the origin of the First Americans." He calls it dubious -- not pseudo- -- science.(The Search for the First Americans. Science, Power, Politics, 2021, U of Oklahoma Press). 136.36.180.215 (talk) 19:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Start-Class Pennsylvania articles
- Low-importance Pennsylvania articles
- Start-Class biography articles
- Start-Class biography (politics and government) articles
- Low-importance biography (politics and government) articles
- Politics and government work group articles
- Start-Class biography (science and academia) articles
- Low-importance biography (science and academia) articles
- Science and academia work group articles
- WikiProject Biography articles
- Start-Class U.S. Congress articles
- Low-importance U.S. Congress articles
- WikiProject U.S. Congress persons
- Start-Class Minnesota articles
- Low-importance Minnesota articles
- Start-Class Minnesota Legislature articles
- Low-importance Minnesota Legislature articles
- Minnesota Legislature task force articles
- Start-Class Philadelphia articles
- Low-importance Philadelphia articles
- Automatically assessed Philadelphia articles
- Start-Class United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- Start-Class United States articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class United States presidential elections articles
- Low-importance United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States presidential elections articles
- WikiProject United States articles