Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki/Archive 2008-09: Difference between revisions

:;<big>Attribution note - this page was created by copying relevant text from [[Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki]] and pasting it here.  Therefore, for attribution, check the [http://wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Category_talk:Active_administrators_of_this_wiki&dir=prev&action=history edit history] of that article, thanks.</big>

=— * 2008—2009 * —=

==Questions about this website...==

#'''RationalWiki point of view:'''  Conservapedia deserves the criticism. Conservapedia regularly blocks and deletes dissent on its website.  They want to prevent criticism similarly here.  There are especially large articles criticizing Conservapedia on Wikiindex because there are special problems with Conservapedia.

#'''Conservapedia point of view:'''  RationalWiki are wiki vandals <s>and irresponsible atheists.  We struggle to keep our wiki Christian and fundamentalist and</s> RationalWiki vandals cause us constant problems. [As a RationalWikian I feel this criticism is partly true of a few RationalWikians but not all.  Some RationalWikians vandalize Conservapedia. The vandals don't think that is wrong because they have such a low opinion of Conservapedia. Atheists are on average as responisble as other people.] These RationalWiki users have created a website to criticise Conservapedia, and have basically been given full editorial privilege to edit the CP page on this wiki. Understandably, the CP page now includes a long criticism section Additionally, much of the RationalWiki page is a criticism of Conservapedia (less so now), and there is an entire additional page ([[Talk:The Conservapedia RationalWiki war]])dedicated to yet more criticisms of Conservapedia. No other wiki has such long prominent criticism and Conservapedia shouldn’t either. Criticism does not seem to be the point of this wiki. If criticism is allowed here, critical sections can spread to other wikis and explode out of control. Some users who appear neutral also feel that criticism shouldn’t be allowed because of this.  

:I've editorialized PC's take on thie issue a bit, since I can better represent the views of Conservapedia than he can.

:If we are going to decide this issue based on whether CP is "bad enough" instead of on whether this wiki is supposed to be a criticism, then I should point out that many of the criticisms are exaggurated, isolated issues, or just plain false. If we are going to have this discussion, then I'll expand my explanation. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 13:49, 22 November 2008 (EST)

::Well you could add 'www.metapedia.org' to the [[MediaWiki:Spam-whitelist]] which allows you to add links to that site on any page and if you are worried about people abusing it, which i doubt, then you could temporarily ad it to the white list, create the article then remove it :)..--[[User:Comets|Comets]] 05:34, 7 December 2008 (EST)

:Don't think so. Kill it with fire. ;) --[[User:Koveras|Koveras]] 12:21, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

::It's dead. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 13:42, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

:Well, [[WikiIndex]] is an index for ''all'' [[wiki]]s, including those about [[:Category:Pornography|porn]].  As long as the descriptions do not actually contain adult content, such entries are fine, in my opinion. Though [[Pornopedia|this one]]'s logo is really stretching it. --[[User:Koveras|Koveras]] 12:21, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

::I've deleted the logo. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 13:40, 14 May 2009 (EDT)

:::The logo was uploaded a second time and I deleted it again. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 13:34, 23 May 2009 (EDT)

You don't see a nipple but it's obvious that the couple are having sex from behind. Some people are tolerant about that but others find it distressing.  It's hard to find a compromise that satisfies everybody from every culture and all parts of the [[:Category:English|English]] speaking world.  I feel since the majority wants to include wikis like Pornpedia allowing information about Pornpedia without actual images is fairly reasonable.  I feel [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Pornopedia&oldid=66179 this revision] was unreasonable as users clicking onto that image came straight to the wiki with yet more images that they may not want to see.  A link to a wiki like that should at least be clearly marked so users don't click onto it unless they want to look at porn. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 07:06, 25 May 2009 (EDT)

::Oh, I guess that makes it ok then... NOT

I was going to instate a formal complaint against Proxima Centauri for pursuing a personal vendetta at [[RationalWiki]] and defending her edits by locking the page, but it appears cooler heads are on the scene, so I'll lie back for now. [[User:Huw Powell|Huw Powell]] 02:50, 2 July 2009 (EDT)

:No idea, probably a random hosting hiccup. Nothing to worry about, as long as this doesn't repeat... --[[User:Koveras|Koveras]] 16:11, 11 August 2009 (EDT)

[[User:Proxima Centauri]] inserted content advertising her own wiki, [[Liberapedia]], into [[RationalWiki]]. I removed that content and improved the article, as well as corrected factual errors. Proxima Centauri reverted everything, blocked me without warning, then locked [[RationalWiki]]. Please unlock [[RationalWiki]], unblock [[User:Nx]] and remove Proxima Centauri's sysops privileges. Thank you. [[User:Nx]]

:She also threatened a block on me when I removed her advertising, though she did not follow it through. [[User:Phantom Hoover|Phantom Hoover]] 16:54, 23 August 2009 (EDT)

==Blacklist==

:It's incompatible with your [[:Category:MediaWiki|mediawiki]] version (1.10), it requires 1.12. [[User:Nx|Nx]] 11:19, 1 September 2009 (EDT)

::Aggh it's all my fault he is gone. Come back Nx. [[User:Lumenos|Lumenos]] 14:59, 8 October 2009 (EDT)