Atheism is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 8, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result May 31, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted December 29, 2006 Good article nominee Not listed April 28, 2007 Featured article candidate Promoted
Current status: Featured article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Religion Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Atheism Top‑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 Top This article has been rated as Top-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 Project's main talk page Article layout Links to atheism-related information · List of free online resources Writing about religion · Article development Citing sources · Verifying sources · About original research Assume good faith · Be civil Recent activity Core articles the "Atheism" article Articles recently added to Category:Atheism To do history watch purge 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. Philosophy: Religion High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Associated task forces: /  Philosophy of religion Theology Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology 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.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Template:WP1.0

Template:Calm talk

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56

This page has archives. Topics inactive for 30 days are automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 4.

I was reading through the article and came across the following sentences that don't appear grammatically correct. Found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism#Theoretical_atheism

"The italian philosopher Carlo Tamagnone i.e. is one of atheist thinkers which assume as basis of their thought the ontological arguments in many his books. In 2010 he issued his last essay titled "God don't exists" (Dio non esiste) just based on ontological reasons concerning physics and biology."

Not being familiar with the details of the information trying to be conveyed I am hesitant to make a change. I would rewrite trying to retain it as I understand it as:

Some theoretical atheists thinkers assume the ontological arguments as basis of their thought. Among such thinkers is Italian philosopher Carlo Tamagnone who presents these ideas in many of his books and an essay based on ontological reasons concerning physics and biology, titled "God don't exists" (Dio non esiste)

Although, having no specific reference currently I am not sure of the validity of the statements. Thoughts? --Ralajer (talk) 14:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the arguments under theoretical atheism cover all reasons for atheisms, i don't know what it would technically be called but what seems an obvious reason to reject religion is the contradictions between many holy texts and the realities of the physical world. Im not talking about contradictions in the definition of a god like omniscience etc, im talking about how the likeliness of any god as described by any religion could possibly exist is very low. Once all world religions can be discredited then wether or not god exists seems redundant. This is a terrible explanation sorry, but i thought the rationale at the moment was incomplete. 114.76.63.231 (talk) 09:43, 8 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A worldwide population of 2.3%?

The only "first-world" country with any sizeable theistic population is the US. The last census I looked at capriciously (or maybe deceitfully) split atheists, agnostics, and "none" into three separate groups.

Europe and Russia is 80+% atheist.

China has 1 billion atheists.

The source for the numbers used in the article was the Encyclopedia Brittanica. Maybe you need to check some other sources. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbrundle (talk • contribs) 20:06, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citation please? ldvhl (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence to support "China has 1 billion atheists" whatsoever. While it is true that the Chinese communist government endorses (and has often enforced) atheism, the reality is that a majority of Chinese people are religious. See Religion in China for more details. The statistics quoted by User:Sbrundle are basically nonsense. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:34, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a difference between religion and theism. Buddhism and Daoism are often non-theist - depends on the variant. Formal Daoism is completely atheist, folk Daoism and folk Buddhism is often theist. OmarKhayyam (talk) 16:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why does every religion article have a criticism link under See also but this Atheism page does not? Is it ironic? I'll assume good faith and add in the link myself. 98.176.12.43 (talk) 05:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are several links to Criticism of Atheism in the article, so there is no need to duplicate the link in the "See also" section. -- Scjessey (talk) 12:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No citation(s) for The bulleted section of Atheism and Morality. The section could very well be accurate, but the lack of citation(s) throw it into question. Also, I apologize about the NPOV boiler for the proceeding text; I couldn't find the "in need of citation" link code:

• In the U.S. states with the highest percentages of atheists, the murder rate is lower than average. In the most religious U.S. states, the murder rate is higher than average.
• Only 0.2% of U.S. prisoners are atheists.
• Atheists are more tolerant towards women's and homosexuals' rights.
• Atheism and secularism correlate with high levels of education, and low levels of racial prejudice.
• Atheists physically abuse their children less often than others, and more often encourage them to think independently.
• In Sweden, the most secular country in the world according to Zuckerman, the charitable aid given is the highest as a proportion of GDP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lusitanic rīvālis azure (talk • contribs) 08:16, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2 sources (#120 and #121) are cited via the opening sentence. The template is {{citation needed}} (or abbreviated {{cn}}). --Cybercobra (talk) 11:25, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The definition of atheism used here is sourced in part to Britannica. I tried to verify the second part of the quote in the reference but searching the entry comes up with nothing. The text in question is the following - "...Instead of saying that an atheist is someone who believes that it is false or probably false that there is a God, a more adequate characterization of atheism consists in the more complex claim that to be an atheist is to be someone who rejects belief in God for the following reasons (which reason is stressed depends on how God is being conceived)...". I was trying to find the reasons listed at first, but could not find this line in the entry at all. Can someone fix this or help me find from where the quote comes please. Thanks.Griswaldo (talk) 18:16, 22 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]