1,136
edits
Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2: Difference between revisions
Talk:RationalWiki (en)/Archive2 (view source)
Revision as of 09:24, 12 September 2009
, 12 September 2009→Does Wikipedia achieve the aims of RationalWiki better than RationalWiki?: fix that link to calling Human/Huw on his bullshit since WikiSynergy turned into a private club
Huw Powell (talk | contribs) |
(→Does Wikipedia achieve the aims of RationalWiki better than RationalWiki?: fix that link to calling Human/Huw on his bullshit since WikiSynergy turned into a private club) |
||
| Line 376: | Line 376: | ||
::One could view this as, not so much a criticism of RationalWiki per se, but a criticism of the stated goals which do not mention any of these fine points you have made. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 22:24, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | ::One could view this as, not so much a criticism of RationalWiki per se, but a criticism of the stated goals which do not mention any of these fine points you have made. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 22:24, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
:::And this brings me to the real "wandalously" crafty reason for this "review"/"interview". If RationalWiki were run by consensus (or "mob rule" or some such funny name for it?), than someone such as yourself should be able to edit those goals to reflect something that is really unique about RW. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 22:29, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | :::And this brings me to the real "wandalously" crafty reason for this "review"/"interview". If RationalWiki were run by consensus (or "mob rule" or some such funny name for it?), than someone such as yourself should be able to edit those goals to reflect something that is really unique about RW. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 22:29, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
::Are others welcome to come and [http:// | ::Are others welcome to come and [http://lumeniki.referata.com/wiki/Multiverse_talk_(WikiSynergy) call you on your BS]? (Note if that link doesn't work it is because [[WikiSynergy]] is having technical difficulties, presently.) [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 22:35, 1 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
You have no clue what reliable sources means at WP do you? There are plenty of "reliable sources" for creationist and other bat shit crazy ideas. Read what WP defines as a RS. WP presents bat shit crazy ideas in a far too sympathetic light. There is also the problem that WP is saturated that it is difficult to follow articles, and they often slip under the radar, with crazy people and their pet ideas being written by proponents. That doesn't happen on RW because the content creation on the site is easily monitored. Also WP is descriptive, RW can be both descriptive and proscriptive. We encourage original research and synthesis of sources and information. We can extend our analysis of ideas and people and movements in directions that WP can not because it is an encyclopedia. There are many examples of ways that we do things different than WP and for our niche we are doing very well. [[User:76.113.112.137|76.113.112.137]] 14:11, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | You have no clue what reliable sources means at WP do you? There are plenty of "reliable sources" for creationist and other bat shit crazy ideas. Read what WP defines as a RS. WP presents bat shit crazy ideas in a far too sympathetic light. There is also the problem that WP is saturated that it is difficult to follow articles, and they often slip under the radar, with crazy people and their pet ideas being written by proponents. That doesn't happen on RW because the content creation on the site is easily monitored. Also WP is descriptive, RW can be both descriptive and proscriptive. We encourage original research and synthesis of sources and information. We can extend our analysis of ideas and people and movements in directions that WP can not because it is an encyclopedia. There are many examples of ways that we do things different than WP and for our niche we are doing very well. [[User:76.113.112.137|76.113.112.137]] 14:11, 2 September 2009 (EDT) | ||