Template:RationalWiki: Difference between revisions
More
(for RationalWiki) |
(More) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''RationalWiki''' is an open [[wiki]] taking a {{tag|Criticism|critical}} look at the {{tag|pseudoscience}} movement and extremist {{tag|politics}}, through the use of side-by-side examinations and {{tag|humor}}. | |||
Stated goals are: | |||
*Analyzing and refuting the anti-science movement, ideas and people. | |||
*Analyzing and refuting the full range of crank ideas. | |||
*Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism. | |||
*Analysis and criticism of how these subjects are handled in the media. | |||
RationalWiki has about 4,723 registered accounts, of which 565 (or 12%) have [[sysop]] rights, which are awarded very liberally by the [[bureaucrat]]s. | |||
RationalWiki runs a large collection of specially customized extensions allowing a wide range of features such as: up-down voting, slider voting, a site wide intercom system, and easy {{tag|Bible}} quotations. | |||
RationalWiki also has a namespace dedicated to [[Conservapedia]]. | |||
==History== | ==History== | ||
RationalWiki started in {{tag|FoundedIn2007|May 2007}} after a group of editors at [[Conservapedia]] were banned over ideological differences with the authorities there. Their edits had consisted mostly of debating on talk pages, attempting to counteract what they perceived to be overwhelming anti-scientific and far-right political biases. Although the site was called RationalWiki to highlight the apparent pro-scientific worldview of the founders, the content was largely weighted to the perceived lunacy of events at Conservapedia. | RationalWiki started in {{tag|FoundedIn2007|May 2007}} after a group of editors at [[Conservapedia]] were banned over ideological differences with the authorities there. Their edits had consisted mostly of debating on talk pages, attempting to counteract what they perceived to be overwhelming anti-scientific and far-right political biases. Although the site was called RationalWiki to highlight the apparent pro-scientific worldview of the founders, the content was largely weighted to the perceived lunacy of events at Conservapedia. | ||