29
edits
Talk:Conservapedia: Difference between revisions
Separating RationalWiki criticism
No edit summary |
(Separating RationalWiki criticism) |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:::::::No, it's a Fundamentalist '''Liberal-Hating''' site. The "Christian" thing is kind of optional, seeing how Andy Schlafly has discovered [http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Adultress_Story Liberal Contamination in the Bible]. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 00:29, 2 August 2008 (EDT) | :::::::No, it's a Fundamentalist '''Liberal-Hating''' site. The "Christian" thing is kind of optional, seeing how Andy Schlafly has discovered [http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Adultress_Story Liberal Contamination in the Bible]. --[[User:Gulik|Gulik]] 00:29, 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) | :::::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 == | |||
Disclaimer: I follow both sites with great interest, and have edited on both sites. | |||
I think it would be wise to separate the RW attitude toward CP from the "professional", "dispassionate", "objective", and "level-headed" treatment we should be giving here. | |||
I'd like to take out the "Many criticisms of the site can be found at RationalWiki" line, so that it is clear that these are '''our''' criticisms. And then put in a section titled something like "The Conservapedia-RationalWiki war" (there's no denying that that's really what it is about.) In that section we can summarize the RW criticisms, pointing out that RW takes great glee in them. And that CP blames RW for most of its vandalism problems (a claim which I strongly doubt, though one can't tell.) | |||
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. | |||
[[User:William Ackerman|William Ackerman]] 17:49, 7 August 2008 (EDT) | |||