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
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
fix duplicated sub-heading
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (fix duplicated sub-heading) |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==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) | ||
:fundamentalist Christian? site partly devoted to homes schooled children? Sorry, more bias. Nowhere on the site is it described as such. Created by home schooled individuals yes. Wiki for all, not fundamentalists.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:27, 30 July 2008 (EDT) | :fundamentalist Christian? site partly devoted to homes schooled children? Sorry, more bias. Nowhere on the site is it described as such. Created by home schooled individuals yes. Wiki for all, not fundamentalists.--[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 17:27, 30 July 2008 (EDT) | ||
::How do you figure a wiki that says that Christian young-earth creationism is unquestionably the absolute truth, and censors and blocks anyone providing facts that dispute that is NOT a fundamentalist Christian site? [[User:92.22.183.214|92.22.183.214]] 20:24, 30 July 2008 (EDT) | ::How do you figure a wiki that says that Christian young-earth creationism is unquestionably the absolute truth, and censors and blocks anyone providing facts that dispute that is NOT a fundamentalist Christian site? [[User:92.22.183.214|92.22.183.214]] 20:24, 30 July 2008 (EDT) | ||
:::On the Kangaroo article we list the evolution, dreamtime, and young earth creationism views, and give them equal validity, notice that wikipedia instead always give the evolution view and never any other views--[[User:Deborah|Deborah]] 07:28, 31 July 2008 (EDT) | :::On the Kangaroo article we list the evolution, dreamtime, and young earth creationism views, and give them equal validity, notice that wikipedia instead always give the evolution view and never any other views--[[User:Deborah|Deborah]] 07:28, 31 July 2008 (EDT) | ||
| Line 32: | Line 29: | ||
I'd also like to expand the "evaluation" section (or put in a new one) into a "difficulties" section, pointing out that CP, because of its extreme stances on things, comes under continual attack that sometimes stresses the limits of what an open wiki can stand. Point out the enormous amount of effort the sysops put into banning people, reverting people, bullying people, and generally fending off the multitudinous attacks from the rest of the web. | I'd also like to expand the "evaluation" section (or put in a new one) into a "difficulties" section, pointing out that CP, because of its extreme stances on things, comes under continual attack that sometimes stresses the limits of what an open wiki can stand. Point out the enormous amount of effort the sysops put into banning people, reverting people, bullying people, and generally fending off the multitudinous attacks from the rest of the web. | ||
And, somewhere in all this, point out how that has compromised the goal of providing an educational resource, as seen by the way even non-controversial topics can't make progress. | And, somewhere in all this, point out how that has compromised the goal of providing an educational resource, as seen by the way even non-controversial topics can't make progress. --[[User:William Ackerman|William Ackerman]] 17:49, 7 August 2008 (EDT) | ||
[[User:William Ackerman|William Ackerman]] 17:49, 7 August 2008 (EDT) | |||
:Sounds fair. Though should "The War" go under CP or RW? Or does it need it's own article - "Wiki wars" or whatever? Such an article might also refer to Librapedia, RWW, Creation Wiki Evowiki and Atheism.wikia. Or would such an article run counter to the ethos of this site?--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 09:12, 11 August 2008 (EDT) | :Sounds fair. Though should "The War" go under CP or RW? Or does it need it's own article - "Wiki wars" or whatever? Such an article might also refer to Librapedia, RWW, Creation Wiki Evowiki and Atheism.wikia. Or would such an article run counter to the ethos of this site?--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 09:12, 11 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) | ::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) | ||
| Line 55: | Line 50: | ||
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) | ||
: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. | I'll put it back, and add more items each time. Eris knows I've got NO shortage of material. (Sorry, Proxima, I tried, but some bunch of numbers just _couldn't_ bear to see Andy's honor besmirched.) --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 20:25, 18 November 2008 (EST) | ||
(Sorry, Proxima, I tried, but some bunch of numbers just _couldn't_ bear to see Andy's honor besmirched.) | |||
--[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 20:25, 18 November 2008 (EST) | |||
:I am not pro Conservapedia. I just don't agree to criticism sections taking up entire articles. -Anon | :I am not pro Conservapedia. I just don't agree to criticism sections taking up entire articles. -Anon | ||
::Are there any sysops around here who aren't part of CP or RW who could tell us if a criticism section fits the goals of this site? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:36, 18 November 2008 (EST) | ::Are there any sysops around here who aren't part of CP or RW who could tell us if a criticism section fits the goals of this site? [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 23:36, 18 November 2008 (EST) | ||
:::It is the only wiki with one!!![[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 07:06, 19 November 2008 (EST) | |||
::: It is the only wiki with one!!![[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 07:06, 19 November 2008 (EST) | |||
:::So it is the only wiki in the whole wikiindex whose own editors are not the ones who edit its entry but its enemies... It is the only thing we get when liberal political correctness control all the media![[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 07:18, 19 November 2008 (EST). | :::So it is the only wiki in the whole wikiindex whose own editors are not the ones who edit its entry but its enemies... It is the only thing we get when liberal political correctness control all the media![[User:Eros of Fire|Eros of Fire]] 07:18, 19 November 2008 (EST). | ||
| Line 84: | Line 74: | ||
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. | ||
May I remind everyone that you are now reading a page on the [[WikiIndex]]? | May I remind everyone that you are now reading a page on the [[WikiIndex]]? I believe that everything is on-topic somewhere[http://www.communitywiki.org/en/OnAndOffTopic]. However, that does not mean that everything is on-topic here at WikiIndex. | ||
I believe that everything is on-topic somewhere[http://www.communitywiki.org/en/OnAndOffTopic]. | |||
However, that does not mean that everything is on-topic here at WikiIndex. | |||
The WikiIndex page "The Conservapedia RationalWiki war" has been deleted because as far as I can tell | The WikiIndex page "The Conservapedia RationalWiki war" has been deleted because as far as I can tell | ||
| Line 92: | Line 80: | ||
(b) that war is not a wiki, and therefore off-topic for WikiIndex. | (b) that war is not a wiki, and therefore off-topic for WikiIndex. | ||
Given that there is an entire wiki dedicated to criticizing Conservapedia, I fail to see why that criticism needs to be re-iterated here at WikiIndex. | Given that there is an entire wiki dedicated to criticizing Conservapedia, I fail to see why that criticism needs to be re-iterated here at WikiIndex. And so I fail to understand why this WikiIndex page needs a criticism section. | ||
And so I fail to understand why this WikiIndex page needs a criticism section. | |||
Nevertheless, mentioning closely-related wiki is helpful for our target audience, and so I find the bullet point | Nevertheless, mentioning closely-related wiki is helpful for our target audience, and so I find the bullet point | ||
| Line 99: | Line 86: | ||
entirely appropriate in this article. | entirely appropriate in this article. | ||
Is it obvious to everyone that I am strongly biased? | Is it obvious to everyone that I am strongly biased? --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:23, 24 November 2008 (EST) | ||
--[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:23, 24 November 2008 (EST) | |||
More discussion at [[Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki#Conservapedia, RationalWiki etc]]. --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:42, 24 November 2008 (EST) | More discussion at [[Category talk:Active administrators of this wiki#Conservapedia, RationalWiki etc]]. --[[User:DavidCary|DavidCary]] 09:42, 24 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| Line 114: | Line 100: | ||
::::I think there should be a section warning potential users that they can get blocked for doing things that they don't know are wrong. I'm not sure what we can do as we agreed to accept independent arbitration. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 16:43, 26 November 2008 (EST) | ::::I think there should be a section warning potential users that they can get blocked for doing things that they don't know are wrong. I'm not sure what we can do as we agreed to accept independent arbitration. [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]] 16:43, 26 November 2008 (EST) | ||
:::::Good idea. I've started a "Editors' Guidelines" section, which I'm sure could be expanded upon. And I stand by my misstatements. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 16:25, 27 November 2008 (EST) | :::::Good idea. I've started a "Editors' Guidelines" section, which I'm sure could be expanded upon. And I stand by my misstatements. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 16:25, 27 November 2008 (EST) | ||
::::::I disagree and have reverted accordingly. They seem to present your personal opinions and not the actual policy of the site. Although Wikiindex does not appear to have a neutrality policy akin to that of Wikipedia, I fail to see how such highly subjective "guidelines" fall into the charter of Wikiindex. We are not offering such "advice" for any other site listed here at Wikiindex and its inclusion is inflammatory. Surely editors can figure out from the current description whether Conservapedia is a wiki they would enjoy (or loathe) working on. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:27, 28 November 2008 (EST) | ::::::I disagree and have reverted accordingly. They seem to present your personal opinions and not the actual policy of the site. Although Wikiindex does not appear to have a neutrality policy akin to that of Wikipedia, I fail to see how such highly subjective "guidelines" fall into the charter of Wikiindex. We are not offering such "advice" for any other site listed here at Wikiindex and its inclusion is inflammatory. Surely editors can figure out from the current description whether Conservapedia is a wiki they would enjoy (or loathe) working on. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:27, 28 November 2008 (EST) | ||
| Line 129: | Line 114: | ||
::But is this really Conservapedia's blocking ''policy''? I see one person's ''opinion'' of what it is. I haven't looked at the rewrite yet, though. I still think we shouldn't be evaluating the worth of the content or the experience of the wikis we list here. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:53, 1 December 2008 (EST) | ::But is this really Conservapedia's blocking ''policy''? I see one person's ''opinion'' of what it is. I haven't looked at the rewrite yet, though. I still think we shouldn't be evaluating the worth of the content or the experience of the wikis we list here. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 17:53, 1 December 2008 (EST) | ||
:::How can I put this politely? Conservapedia has a rather noticeable disconnect between its STATED policies for sysops and the way those sysops actually ACT. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 15:26, 4 December 2008 (EST) | :::How can I put this politely? Conservapedia has a rather noticeable disconnect between its STATED policies for sysops and the way those sysops actually ACT. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 15:26, 4 December 2008 (EST) | ||
::::That was polite. :-) --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:54, 4 December 2008 (EST) | ::::That was polite. :-) --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:54, 4 December 2008 (EST) | ||
| Line 136: | Line 120: | ||
: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) | :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]] | ==Move to article page when agreed upon by 3 [[Sysops]] & 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) | ||
| Line 153: | Line 137: | ||
--[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 08:13, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | --[[User:Bob M|Bob M]] 08:13, 10 September 2009 (EDT) | ||
{{Table of articles}}<!--keep this section and table at the BOTTOM of this talk page--> | |||