Comments | amuzulo: Conservapedia

amuzulo

Conservapedia

Mar 07, 2007 13:43

Some things never cease to amaze me. Today I found the Conservapedia... i.e. the Wikipedia written from an American Conservative Christian point of view. Wow. The Guardian has a really nice piece on them. The article about Evolution is now named Theory of Evolution and the Abortion article only says negative things about abortion. Really ( Read more... )

Comments 8

6opou March 7 2007, 14:29:59 UTC

I'd be more okay with it, if it was still a "valid from a point of view" information source. After looking at the abortion article, a high school student in a conservative christian school still wouldn't be able to write a report about abortion.

kinnerc March 7 2007, 14:48:38 UTC

Dankon, Ĉuk, por la plej fortimiga artikolo, ke mi legis hodiaŭ. :-\

*Suspiras*

arono March 7 2007, 15:02:06 UTC

Wow, those are some ugly-ass logos.

goulo March 7 2007, 22:23:31 UTC

Wow, no kidding. And the discussion about the logo proposals is surreal at times. E.g.Um, just a quick point here: while using the Cross is nice, you're going to have problems with the conservative Jews that may wish to use the site. Perhaps we should find a completely new idea that doesn't make our fellow conservatives uncomfortable. --Katie 22:26, 18 January 2007 (EST)

Well, considering the project is officialy Christian and conservative... I do however understand how such editors might feel more uncomfortable editing a project that used an avowedly Christian symbol. I'd be more concerned about the Church/State implications of such a symbol, but that might just be me. JoshuaZ 15:44, 1 March 2007 (EST)
I.e. "The site is conservative Christian, but maybe the logo shouldn't actually reflect that since it might be offputting", I guess ( ... )

goulo March 7 2007, 15:25:37 UTC

Conservapedia is a hot meme lately, and I've seen much speculation and occasional evidence that it is a total hoax satirizing fundamentalists, or that some subtle sabotage editing is done to it to increase its absurdity beyond its intended sincere level. Or maybe it is all for real and some people really are that crazy.

http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004258.html has an example of apparent subtle pranksterism.

http://jaylake.livejournal.com/964797.html has some more comments on the wackiness that is Conservapedia.

ghewgill March 9 2007, 07:20:58 UTC

Even if it is a hoax, there's enough crazy people out there that will think it's real, and it will acquire a life of its own anyway.

amuzulo March 9 2007, 08:56:32 UTC

Heck, I first edited Wikipedia in April 2001 (Wikipedia was created in January 2001). At the time, the site was practically a joke. I returned in September and saw that it was starting to become a real serious site. Who knows what kinds of stuff can change in several months time in a wiki?

ex_sonjaaa March 8 2007, 17:20:56 UTC

a a a! jan Mewika li nasa mute!