Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
Talk:Conservapedia: Difference between revisions
{{TOCright}}, tidy, rv whitespace
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) (→sortable list of articles: exported text to new Template:Table of articles, re-imported via {{table of articles}}) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) ({{TOCright}}, tidy, rv whitespace) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Oops == | {{TOCright}} | ||
==Oops== | |||
I replaced the text accidentally. I intended to press the preview button and must have pressed save accidentally. Sorry. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 10:13, 10 June 2008 (EDT) | I replaced the text accidentally. I intended to press the preview button and must have pressed save accidentally. Sorry. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 10:13, 10 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
== Critical tone == | ==Critical tone== | ||
I'm new to WikiIndex, but I can't imagine that its tone is supposed to be so openly critical. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] 15:22, 25 June 2008 (EDT) | I'm new to WikiIndex, but I can't imagine that its tone is supposed to be so openly critical. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] 15:22, 25 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
:::::Deborah, if you seriously think Conservapedia comes across as in any way unbiased, you're only fooling yourself. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 14:24, 2 August 2008 (EDT) | :::::Deborah, if you seriously think Conservapedia comes across as in any way unbiased, you're only fooling yourself. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 14:24, 2 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
== Separating RationalWiki criticism == | ==Separating RationalWiki criticism== | ||
Disclaimer: I follow both sites with great interest, and have edited on both sites. | Disclaimer: I follow both sites with great interest, and have edited on both sites. | ||
| Line 39: | Line 38: | ||
::I lean towards putting it under CP. The war tends to be '''about''' CP but '''by''' RW. Most of what would go into the section would describe CP, so that's where it belongs. A mention and link in the RW article, of course. As far as a separate article, or even a category of such, I'm too new a user here to take that step. Is that something this site should be going into? Not for me to say. [[User:William Ackerman|William Ackerman]] 14:23, 14 August 2008 (EDT) | ::I lean towards putting it under CP. The war tends to be '''about''' CP but '''by''' RW. Most of what would go into the section would describe CP, so that's where it belongs. A mention and link in the RW article, of course. As far as a separate article, or even a category of such, I'm too new a user here to take that step. Is that something this site should be going into? Not for me to say. [[User:William Ackerman|William Ackerman]] 14:23, 14 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
== Lengthy criticisms == | ==Lengthy criticisms== | ||
I dislike CP as well, but Wikiindex seems to be, well, an index: a very short description of the wikis, some technical details, some links. CP is unique in that it has a ''whole entire wiki'' dedicated to criticizing it and drawing attention to its worst abuses and most comical moments. Isn't that sort of thing beyond the scope of this site? [[User:74.7.166.234|74.7.166.234]] 14:42, 13 November 2008 (EST) | I dislike CP as well, but Wikiindex seems to be, well, an index: a very short description of the wikis, some technical details, some links. CP is unique in that it has a ''whole entire wiki'' dedicated to criticizing it and drawing attention to its worst abuses and most comical moments. Isn't that sort of thing beyond the scope of this site? [[User:74.7.166.234|74.7.166.234]] 14:42, 13 November 2008 (EST) | ||
: Looking at [[Special:Longpages]], it basically has the longest description of any wiki. ([[Uncyclopedia]] has more bytes, but has a 325 word description compared to Conservapedia's 1661 words; [[Transontologia]] is an unwikified cut-n-paste) --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] 15:21, 13 November 2008 (EST) | : Looking at [[Special:Longpages]], it basically has the longest description of any wiki. ([[Uncyclopedia]] has more bytes, but has a 325 word description compared to Conservapedia's 1661 words; [[Transontologia]] is an unwikified cut-n-paste) --[[User:Interiot|Interiot]] 15:21, 13 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| Line 52: | Line 50: | ||
::Go figure, the criticism is back. Why don't we just make this page a link to RationalWiki? That's the only reason this article seems to exist. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:04, 17 November 2008 (EST) | ::Go figure, the criticism is back. Why don't we just make this page a link to RationalWiki? That's the only reason this article seems to exist. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:04, 17 November 2008 (EST) | ||
Racist anti-white anti-christian people are managing Wikiindex now? Why the hell Conservapedia needs a criticims section no other wiki has one! [[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 14:07, 18 November 2008 (EST) | |||
Come on... it is just an index! If you want criticism, go to Wikipedia! That section must be moved. [[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 14:09, 18 November 2008 (EST) | |||
Come on... it is just an index! If you want criticism, go to Wikipedia! That section must be moved.[[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 14:09, 18 November 2008 (EST) | |||
Or deleted...[[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 14:09, 18 November 2008 (EST) | Or deleted...[[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 14:09, 18 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| Line 62: | Line 58: | ||
:A general shortlist of criticisms is appropriate, I think, since, well, it's hard to talk about something like CP (parts of which border on a hate site) without being critical, and a (brief) description of the shennanigans that go on there could be appropriate in a general description. What is not helpful in an index is a lengthy, mind-numbing, RationalWiki-style point-by-point trudge through all of CP's problems. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] 15:15, 18 November 2008 (EST) | :A general shortlist of criticisms is appropriate, I think, since, well, it's hard to talk about something like CP (parts of which border on a hate site) without being critical, and a (brief) description of the shennanigans that go on there could be appropriate in a general description. What is not helpful in an index is a lengthy, mind-numbing, RationalWiki-style point-by-point trudge through all of CP's problems. [[User:Fishal|Fishal]] 15:15, 18 November 2008 (EST) | ||
== Go ahead, keep deleting the "Criticism" section | ==Go ahead, keep deleting the "Criticism" section== | ||
I'll put it back, and add more items each time. Eris knows I've got NO shortage of material. <br/> | I'll put it back, and add more items each time. Eris knows I've got NO shortage of material. <br/> | ||
(Sorry, Proxima, I tried, but some bunch of numbers just _couldn't_ bear to see Andy's honor besmirched.) | (Sorry, Proxima, I tried, but some bunch of numbers just _couldn't_ bear to see Andy's honor besmirched.) | ||
| Line 86: | Line 81: | ||
:Check out the convo [[Category_talk:Active_administrators_of_this_wiki#Conservapedia.2C_RationalWiki_etc|here]]. I'm fine with taking out the links (if that is the final comprimise), but I don't agree to many of your other changes. For example, you added that users were blocked for adding "non-christian information"; not only is this not really true, but it's more of a criticism than a compliment, when is what I assume you were going for. Also, conservatives ''do'' criticize CP, so I don't know why you keep removing that. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 18:35, 23 November 2008 (EST) | :Check out the convo [[Category_talk:Active_administrators_of_this_wiki#Conservapedia.2C_RationalWiki_etc|here]]. I'm fine with taking out the links (if that is the final comprimise), but I don't agree to many of your other changes. For example, you added that users were blocked for adding "non-christian information"; not only is this not really true, but it's more of a criticism than a compliment, when is what I assume you were going for. Also, conservatives ''do'' criticize CP, so I don't know why you keep removing that. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 18:35, 23 November 2008 (EST) | ||
== Wikiindex == | ==Wikiindex== | ||
I have been asked[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADavidCary&diff=59927&oldid=59646] how much criticism is appropriate in the this Conservapedia article. | I have been asked[http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADavidCary&diff=59927&oldid=59646] how much criticism is appropriate in the this Conservapedia article. | ||
| Line 138: | Line 132: | ||
::::That was polite. :-) --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:54, 4 December 2008 (EST) | ::::That was polite. :-) --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:54, 4 December 2008 (EST) | ||
== WtF? == | ==WtF?== | ||
This article wasn't even controversial. [[User:Phantom Hoover|Phantom Hoover]] 06:09, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | This article wasn't even controversial. [[User:Phantom Hoover|Phantom Hoover]] 06:09, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:I was surprised also. [[ | :I was surprised also. [[User talk:This is not the solution#Thanks to everyone for the cooling off - here is my idea on how to move through this.|Dilley said he was planning on doing it]], but I thought he had changed his mind or something. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 12:39, 7 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
==Move to article page when agreed upon by 3 [[Sysops]] and 3 people involved [[ | ==Move to article page when agreed upon by 3 [[Sysops]] and 3 people involved [[User talk:This is not the solution#Thanks to everyone for the cooling off - here is my idea on how to move through this.|in the conflict]]== | ||
:What bloody conflict?! The only recent edit was Rpeh updating the stats! Ugh... UPDATE people SET sanity="insane" WHERE name="MarkDilley"; [[User:Phantom Hoover|Phantom Hoover]] 10:08, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | :What bloody conflict?! The only recent edit was Rpeh updating the stats! Ugh... UPDATE people SET sanity="insane" WHERE name="MarkDilley"; [[User:Phantom Hoover|Phantom Hoover]] 10:08, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::I've already [http://www.wikiindex.org/User_talk:MarkDilley#Deletions_and_Protections made that point] but fingers seem to be in ears and the strains of "La la la! Can't hear you!" echo over the land. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 10:18, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ::I've already [http://www.wikiindex.org/User_talk:MarkDilley#Deletions_and_Protections made that point] but fingers seem to be in ears and the strains of "La la la! Can't hear you!" echo over the land. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 10:18, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::Very well then. Perhaps people have left this place because it was so boring before this event, and that is why you were unaware of any [[ | ::Very well then. Perhaps people have left this place because it was so boring before this event, and that is why you were unaware of any [[User talk:This is not the solution#Thanks to everyone for the cooling off - here is my idea on how to move through this.|conflict]]. Would you gentlemen make controversy out of a harmless proposal to have pages devoted to criticism (or debate) for wikis such as these? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:30, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::: OMG it's Ken. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 16:39, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ::: OMG it's Ken. [[User:Rpeh|rpeh]] 16:39, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::: Well, now I implore of you; was ''that'' really worthy of announcing over the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_address PA system] of [[ | :::: Well, now I implore of you; was ''that'' really worthy of announcing over the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_address PA system] of [[User talk:Lumenos#Rpeh.27s second example of .22trolling.22|the sacred "Recent Changes"]]? [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 19:17, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
==Now what?== | ==Now what?== | ||
Are we supposed to edit this or just list suggestions? In any case, I think the "Suggested guidelines for prospective editors" section should be removed. Wikiindex shouldn't encourage sockpuppeting and should remain neutral [[User:Nx|Nx]] 07:29, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | Are we supposed to edit this or just list suggestions? In any case, I think the "Suggested guidelines for prospective editors" section should be removed. Wikiindex shouldn't encourage sockpuppeting and should remain neutral [[User:Nx|Nx]] 07:29, 6 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:Editing above the TOC. I'll second that proposal! [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:30, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | :Editing above the TOC. I'll second that proposal! [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 16:30, 8 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
==Move to article page - vote== | ==Move to article page - vote== | ||
As the statement at the top says: ''Move to article page when agreed upon by 3 [[Sysops]] and 3 people involved'' I propose that we do just that.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 08:13, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | As the statement at the top says: ''Move to article page when agreed upon by 3 [[Sysops]] and 3 people involved'' I propose that we do just that.--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 08:13, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | ||