<hiero> tag and WikiHiero
Is it possible to introduce support for WikiHiero on Conservapedia? On Wikipedia it is possible to insert hieroglyphs into an article using this tag along with the WikiHiero syntax to enter the signs correctly. It'd be useful to have this feature here too. --Krysg 07:54, 10 December 2008 (EST)
Someone is trying to steal my password
I recently received this E-mail:
Someone (probably you, from IP address 18.104.22.168) requested that we send you a new password for Conservapedia (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php). The password for user "Kuyper" is now "[removed]". You should log in and change your password now. If someone else made this request or if you have remembered your password and you no longer wish to change it, you may ignore this message and continue using your old password.
You might want to consider looking into this as hacking is a serious problem. Kuyper 16:50, 28 December 2008 (EST)
- The operative phrase is below. There wasn't any "hacking" or even "cracking" here.
If someone else made this request or if you have remembered your password and you no longer wish to change it, you may ignore this message and continue using your old password.
How to edit?
I read the article on Barak Obama. Basically, it is a train wreck. I am not an expert on him, but I thought I could at least take out all the snide innuendo's, and even if the artilce is much shorter, at least it will be more credible. He is, after all, the President of the United States, and deserves some minimal respect.
However, I have no idea how to edit articles on this thing, and there is just about no help or assistance. It certainly does not seem to be user friendly.
So, I am just about ready to give up.
I also read the article on Virgnia, since that is where I am from. Under the list of counties, it only had about half of them. It was a terribel article. I do not understand how this organizaiton works, but many of the articles are not vey good, and then when you invite people to edit them, how do we do it?
- With all due respect, your misspellings are the worst I've seen. Please improve and then try to improve the Virginia article, with good spelling. Thanks much, and Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 21:44, 18 January 2009 (EST)
There are some very serious problems with the entries concerning topics related to Confucianism. Many of entries are not strictly incorrect but are sufficiently superficial to be grossly misleading. When it comes to topics as foreign as Confucianism, brevity is not your friend. I will try to help, but unfortunately I do not have the time or the resources to do everything that needs doing. You need a total overhaul.
Noah's Ark Page Locked
I would like to create responses to the criticisms on the Noah's Ark article but the page has been locked by an administrator. The problem is that the locking admin (MountainDew/DanH) is MIA.
Can I get a little help? CherylE 12:54, 29 January 2009 (EST)
- I've unlocked it. Philip J. Rayment 15:02, 29 January 2009 (EST)
I've made many edits this month, but most of them have disappeared from "my contributions" and from the pages I edited. Also, many of the math pages (e.g. Covariance) can't display formulas properly. Finally, another user made an edit to my user page a while ago. But that edit has also disappeared from the record. What's going on? Sjay 21:11, 30 January 2009 (EST)
- Conservapedia suffered a hard drive failure earlier this week. We restored up until the 19th, and are adding more current revisions manually, as we find them viable. Sorry for the loss, it has effected all of us. Look for bits and pieces to appear back slowly, bit by bit. --₮K/Admin/Talk 01:17, 31 January 2009 (EST)
- The hard drive failure explains the missing edits, but why isn't the math environment working? The following should appear as an equation, but doesn't:
- The math problems are a problem related to moving to a new server. Other, more major issues are taking priority over the math. I'll get to is soon though. CPWebmaster 16:30, 3 February 2009 (EST)
I created a new page for the Show hannity that took over Hannity and colmes. I'm not sure what I did, but linking to Hannity & Colmes directs to Hannity. If an admin could let me know what I did wrong so I can fix it, that would be great. Thanks.--Tyler 23:58, 1 February 2009 (EST)
- Well I found the problem, Hannity & Colmes is for some reason linking to Hannity and not Hannity and Colmes...--Tyler 00:04, 2 February 2009 (EST)
- We've had problems in the past with ampersands in article names, although I thought that problem had disappeared. Perhaps it is back again. Philip J. Rayment 08:16, 3 February 2009 (EST)
The past few times I've checked the site all the pages were protected. One time was around 3PM. Was there an extension of the 1-6AM closing? CMcFreeze 09:55, 8 February 2009 (EST)
- Conservapedia's editing is turned off over-night, for all but Administrators and specially righted editors. That would generally be between Midnight and 6:00AM, Eastern Standard Time, U.S. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:02, 8 February 2009 (EST)
Requested move of Hull City F.C.
Not sure if this is the right place, but can the article Hull City F.C. please be moved to Hull City A.F.C, as that is the correct name of the club. (see the badge and the club website here. Thanks, Ozoo 14:56, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
How to start?
Just joined and want to edit an article.
If I know that part of the information is incorrect should I first describe the changes I'm going to make on the talk page or should I just go ahead and make the changes? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ChrisMH -- 09:08, 1 December 2009 (EST) (talk)
- Glad you joined! In my totally unofficial opinion: If the article's been undergoing a lot of controversy recently, or if there's been controversy before about the issues you want to address, I'd describe the changes. If it's been undergoing a lot of editing recently, and the changes are major, I'd describe them. Otherwise, I'd go right ahead and edit; if someone objects, he can always (revert and) describe his objections. This's what I'd do; it's definitely not official policy. --EvanW 11:27, 1 December 2009 (EST)
- Chris, the important thing to remember is that encyclopedia's rely on facts. That means having verifiable sources included with your edits. If you or I know something is a fact, and we add it to an article, that doesn't help other users without their ability to confirm it with a reliable source. Please check the links I placed on your talk page, including our Manual of Style for help. Our Guidelines will also be of help. Remember part of your online reputation includes not using anonymous proxies to mask your location. That said, welcome to you as well, and that is the official word on your question! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 11:43, 1 December 2009 (EST)
I noticed your main page states "wikiproject" - I recommend changing to "pediaproject" or something along those lines; don't want to reinforce or reference wikipedia, sticking to conservapedia. sw
Technical problem creating AT&T article
I've recently attempted to create an article about telephone giant AT&T, but having technical difficulties. The article is created, but attempting to view the article results in an error message stating that there is no article for "AT." Basically, attempting to view "AT&T" results in "AT" being displayed. Anyway we can fix this? AT&T is the largest telephone provider worldwide, certainly worthy of an article if Vodafone is. DMorris 22:21, 27 December 2009 (EST)
Keep Needing to Reset My Password
I apologize if I'm posting this in the wrong place; I'm still relatively new here. After I log out every time, the next time I log in, the form says that my password is incorrect. I e-mail myself a new password, then promptly change my password to something new. The website accepts it and I log in, but after I log out and try to log back in, the same situation happens. Could this because I'm trying to log in from a blocked IP? I'm at a university campus where account creation is blocked by IP, but I spoke with TK and was cleared to create an account from my home IP. Thank you for the help! Tzoran 14:50, 1 February 2010 (EST)
My new article.
Hi there. I've added the article Nick Clegg. I've researched it, and tried to make it work. I'd really appreciate if somebody would take a look and let me know if it's the right kind of style. Thank you. --Newton 12:21, 11 March 2010 (EST)
Regarding the UK
Hello. I'd like to take a serious role in the UK side of Conservapedia, and try to get some serious articles done about the United Kingdom from a proper Christian conservative point of view. Peraonlly, I think that all of the political parties in the United Kingdom are liberal.. it's just a matter of being more or less liberal. But that's just my opinion. Anyway, sorry for rambling...
If any of the administrators would like to request an article about the UK, please let me know on my talk page. I'm more than happy to accept writing assignments. Who knows? Maybe if I write enough good articles, you'll come to think of me as your 'UK Politics & Religion Editor.'
I'm going to bed now, take care. --Newton 23:49, 25 March 2010 (EDT)
- Thanks, Newton! Dive right in, and I am certain any of us who see the need will do as you ask and post on your talk page. I am sure many of the U.K articles we have are in need, as some I have spotted misleading information and removed it. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 00:58, 26 March 2010 (EDT)
- Is there a way that I could possibly edit during your night-time period? Who would I speak to about this? At the moment, I can't edit before 10am. On days when I'm in class, I'm often up at 7am or 8am, and have a lot of free time to edit. --Newton 19:12, 26 March 2010 (EDT)
- Sorry Newton, you have to earn that through contributions--Jpatt 19:16, 26 March 2010 (EDT)
- Okay, that's reasonable. Thanks for your quick reply. --Newton 19:20, 26 March 2010 (EDT)
- Wuhao1911 blocked him, thank you. I have removed all of his edits. At first I just removed the obvious vandalism, but then I noticed the blasphemous comments and that he has inserted parts into peoples' debate arguements, so it is all gone. Newton 13:34, 29 March 2010 (EDT)
Content for Geeks
- You are registered here, and adding technical articles such as you suggest doesn't need permission or discussion to add, JlHawkwell. Please proceed! --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:35, 2 August 2010 (EDT)
What should I edit?
- I believe Mr. Schlafly responded to this same question on his talk page, so please proceed. --ṬK/Admin/Talk 14:27, 16 November 2010 (EST)
"Slug" article - Candidate For Deletion
I don't mean to complain, but the article "Slug" is just so embarrassingly bad in so many different ways that it should be deleted. I don't have the energy to write an article on slugs - because this thing is not really editable - somebody should start over. PaulBurnett 00:47, 27 November 2010 (EST)
- Looks like Karajou removed the false information that was added by vandal trolls, Paul. I think you can now delete such articles or alter them, as you see fit. :D --ṬK/Admin/Talk 01:56, 27 November 2010 (EST)
I participate as a Conservative on another board. One of the members of my group has been a regular user of Conservapedia, but recently began having difficulty accessing your site. She is getting 403 errors. I would appreciate it if you would give me an e-mail address that I can pass on to her so that she may contact someone with your site in order to find out why she is being forbidden access.
Any assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated.
- Contact info for this account-related issue is on the front page: email@example.com . Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly 00:35, 5 February 2011 (EST)
I May Have Been Blocked but I wasn't
Hey. I don't know if this is the place to post this, but it didn't seem to fit into any of the other categories. A user posted on my talk page that I was blocked and didn't sign it. I have only made a few edits and am very new here and no reason was specified for the block. However, I am still able to edit pages so I don't think I was actually blocked. So what is going on? Thank you. Gregkochuconn 09:39, 23 March 2011 (EDT)
- nope! you're not blocked, or you wouldn't be able to edit - the user was a vandal.--IDuan 09:41, 23 March 2011 (EDT)
Hello, I am trying to get the latest CBP compilations, when I click on the "click hear" it directs me to a google group i am not a part of and don't have sufficient permissions for. I downloaded the pdfs awhile back to start reading, am I obviously missing something on how to get the pdf compilations or is that out of commission? Thank You
- Good question. The pdf compilations have been a helpful format, but I'm not sure if they are up to date. I will look into this. Thanks for the inquiry.--Andy Schlafly 23:37, 28 May 2011 (EDT)
Hello again, Any luck on the compilations? still can't access them.
/how do I start a new page
how doI start a new page?? Help??
Can whoever made this site make an RSS feed for the "in the news" thing?
Weird error on Bias in Wikipedia page
I'm trying to edit Bias in Wikipedia. I tried to remove an item from the list that I moved to another page, but I get this error:
The page you wanted to save was blocked by the spam filter. This is probably caused by a link to a blacklisted external site. The following text is what triggered our spam filter: p u e r i l e Return to Examples of Bias in Wikipedia.
How can I edit the page? I'm not doing anything related to that word or link. In fact I had to add spaces to the word on this page to get it to save! RickTx 17:10, 26 April 2012 (EDT)
- I don't know. Maybe some automatic filter that is attempting to filter childish edits is actually filtering edits that have a synonym for childish. Let's see if this gets blocked. Gregkochuconn 15:08, 22 May 2012 (EDT)
Could someone please correct the spelling of "Nazism" in the Bias in Wikipedia navbox (or infobox, I always mix those up). It is spelled "Naziism" but the template is protected. When you are done, you should also move the page on Nazism, Communism, and whatever else we lumped in there to reflect the proper spelling. I don't want to do that first or it will cause problems in the interim. Gregkochuconn 15:06, 22 May 2012 (EDT)
Profanity in Proper Name
What should be done about a moderate profanity in a proper name? I'm trying to make an article about the 2010 New York Gubernatorial Election, but I realized that one of the parties was the "Rent is Too D*** High Party", with the censored word spelled out in the official name. Should I spell out the word, since that is the official name of the Party? Keep in mind that Jimmy McMillan, who was the party's nominee, sued the NY Board of Elections to keep that word in the Party name after they took it out for length reasons (they eventually settled out of court by shortening "Too" to "2" and keeping it under the maximum length). I don't want him suing Conservapedia if we take it out, and I wouldn't put it past him to do so. Gregkochuconn 15:07, 28 May 2012 (EDT)
Blocked and no idea how to let you know about a great article for the news
Blitzman: Hello, I was blocked in 2009 by TK for reasons he/she would not tell me. I saw some typos in several pages but did not want to write any articles. If I did something wrong tell me. I was Blitzman just added Blitzman7 so I could add this. I have no idea why you don't have a contact us area?!?! I wanted to tell you to post this news article on the main page if you want: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/creationists-convince-south-korean-officials-to-remove-evolutionary-references-from-high-school-textbooks/
If this does not post I give up.
Hi. I added the "Articles in Need of an Image" tag to my article http://www.conservapedia.com/Full_Asylum about a week ago but it doesn't seem to have been uploaded yet. Did I miss something?
Can someone with the appropriate administrator powers please rename Midnight Solstice The Near Nirvana Oras to "Midnight Solstice The Near Nirvana Auras"? I'm sorry but in the heat of the moment I had a little lapse in judgement and made that typo. Thanks.--Mikon8er 02:56, 12 December 2012 (EST)
- Done. Conservative 10:48, 12 December 2012 (EST)
The following pages are double redirects, but are locked to prevent editing:
- Fixed now. Thanks for pointing it out. Taj 13:46, 15 December 2012 (EST)
Can someone with sufficient privileges move "Burj_Dubai" to "Burj Khalifa"? At it's opening ceremony, that's what the tower was renamed. Burj Dubai, the tallest building in the world, opens and is renamed Burj Khalifa
Thanks. --Mikon8er 21:10, 26 December 2012 (EST)
- Dome :) Karajou 21:15, 26 December 2012 (EST)
I think a user named Markr may be a troll.
An event that is truly supernatural could not be used to prove the existance of a specific God. To prove it was a supernatural event would mean to falsify EVERY natural explanation and would therefore require knowing everything including the knowledge that there is nothing left to know. Religions that tolerate other religions are admitting that they may be wrong and the God they worship might be a fake. Markr 12:26, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
The above quote comes from Markr. I may be wrong, but he seems to be trying to subtly say "you cannot prove God". Despite the large amount of Biblical scientific knowledge and all the prophecies that have come through. This sounds like he is subtly suggesting that he is not Christan. If not Vhristan then what is he? Hindu? Muslim? Atheist? Check what religion he says he is on his page and ask him about it. I do not want to cause trouble, I just want to help.
Reasonless has a liberal bias.
Individual freedoms...Except when they contradict an obscure biblical passage? Or individual freedoms, except when they make soccer moms mildly queasy? Or individual freedoms except that person isn't an American, so why should they have freedoms? I strongly disagree that conservatism is based on individual freedoms. --Reasonless 23:43, 23 March 2008 (EDT)
The above passage is from a talk page. As you can clearly see, Reasonless is clearly making a mistake about Consrvative Philosphy. P,ease correct him about it.
Splitting one article into two articles
Is there a way to split one article into two articles, leaving the same prior edit history in both and then letting the edit history diverge after the time of splitting as individual edits are made to either of the split articles? HPadleckas 09:40, 18 February 2014 (EST)
Requesting article Move (rename)
I request that the article Analytic chemistry be moved (renamed) to Analytical chemistry (currently a Redirect), which actually the name used for this field. Up to this point, I have not found a place in Conservapedia to request an article Move (renaming) better than this page. Although I could copy and paste the contents to the target page, that would not preserve the edit history in Analytic chemistry.
I have degrees in chemistry (one from an well-established Catholic university) and have been an analytical chemist and otherwise involved with chemistry in my career. I have not heard of analytical chemistry being called "analytic chemistry" nor an analytical chemist being called an "analytic chemist". Furthermore, I did an internet search for both "analytical chemistry" and "analytic chemistry" and found the following results:
analytical chemistry - 18,100,000 results
analytic chemistry - 1,250,000 results
Furthermore, a scan of the first page or two of the "analytic chemistry" results shows the term "analytical chemistry" is used even in these results. This topic is covered in articles or pages called "Analytical chemistry" in both Wikipedia, Citizendium, a Royal Society of Chemistry wiki called "Learning Chemistry" and a UCDavis ChemWiki site, all of which I'm a member. HPadleckas 21:18, 18 February 2014 (EST)
I only noticed this because I found a reference to it on a "rational" wiki site (I won't provide the link, it would only get them more attention) which seems obsessed with Conservapedia.
When a new section was added to the Main Page talk page a paragraph from another section disappeared. The section added was Missing Malaysian plane, but the affected section was Mendacity or ignorance? The people over at the aforementioned site are a bit paranoid and think this is the result of some kind of wiki revisionist censorship by the user Conservative. I may have my disagreements with Conservative (which in fact is what that paragraph was about) but I don't believe in slandering him like that. If any of you can find this bug and fix it then that would be very helpful because as long as it continues it just gives these trolls ammunition in their little "rational" war on truth.
I would suggest that anyone adding a new section to a talk page should watch carefully for this happening again and report it immediately to the admins! Maybe this is a problem with MediaWiki software; should we inform them?
JamesWS 19:38, 15 March 2014 (EDT)