Talk:The Survival Blog
- 1 Authorization by NYT Best-Selling Conservative Christian Preparedness Author James Wesley Rawles to use "up to 3 Quotes of 800 Words Each" of his Writings per CP Article
- 2 Temporary 7 Day Ban: WShact again removing Conservative POV material from Survival/Firearm Related Articles
- 3 Comments from Others
Authorization by NYT Best-Selling Conservative Christian Preparedness Author James Wesley Rawles to use "up to 3 Quotes of 800 Words Each" of his Writings per CP Article
- Good news User:Conservative is that I was discussing on e-mail today with James Wesley Rawles to get his permission to use a larger than normal "fair use" amount of his authoritative source materials to build some good quality articles on a variety of Conservative-related topics. He is the most respected and popular New York Times best selling author/consultant in the field of Preparedness (from a Conservative Christian perspective with 7 books authored). 'He gave me the go ahead: "You are certainly welcome to use up to three quotes of 800 words each, in any of your wiki articles." That's 2400 words of great source material with me writing a wrapper around it and integrating other materials plus all the Wiki-link work and formatting following the CP Conservapedia:Manual of Style.' (See below for the actual e-mail authorization.)
Mr. Rawles site's The Survival Blog is amazingly detailed and has received almost '71 million unique visits since July 2005. That's more than 320,000 unique visits per week.' SurvivalBlog it is considered the Internet’s premier source of information on family preparedness and survival topics.
'He is a big fan of Conservapedia and links to it where possible, doing his best to avoid the "LiberalPropagandaPedia".' Here is more info: http://survivalblog.com/archivecd. According to Google there are more than 142,000 results for "SurvivalBlog.com".
'These articles will definitely help draw a new audience to Conservapedia.' TheAmericanRedoubt 16:17, 30 December 2014 (EST)
- Glad to hear your good news. In terms of creating an online encyclopedia resource related to survivalism and sub topics related to survivalism, I am guessing you will be able to surpass Wikipedia in terms of the quality/quantity of information that is provided. Conservative 16:28, 30 December 2014 (EST)
- Most definitely. And as Jack Spirko of the Survival Podcast (with more than 500,000 daily listeners as of December 2014) has said on a recent podcast, his audience is almost entirely conservative. Same with that of James Wesley Rawles and most other preppers. TheAmericanRedoubt 17:00, 30 December 2014 (EST)
Total of 2400 Words worth of Quotes Authorized from James Wesley Rawles Works
In general (for non-Conservapedia editors), James Wesley Rawles , founder/owner of The Survival Blog has suggested 800 words seems to be a reasonable and commonplace excerpt/quoting amount for Fair Use (See Important Fair Use Provisos)
However, for editors of Conservapedia, he has made a special authorization of 3x that quantity:
Forwarded message from "Senior Editor at SurvivalBlog.com"
From: "Senior Editor at SurvivalBlog.com" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Jefferson Franklin
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 09:46:09 -0700
Thank you VERY much for your tireless efforts. As a token of my esteem, and so that you will have current reference copies, I'll be happy to send you autographed copies of all of my books. Just send me your snail mail address.
You are certainly welcome to use up to three quotes of 800 words each, in any of your wiki articles.
OBTW, the is also a decent collection of quotes here: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Wesley_Rawles (Thankfully, It hasn't been gutted by liberal Wikipedia editors.)
Thanks Again, and Happy New Year!
Senior Editor, www.SurvivalBlog.com
Here is an example of "Rawles" quote: "As I’ve mentioned before, Wikipedia’s editors have strong leftist and statist biases. This is evidenced by the way that they selectively delete content and gradually push the Point of View (POV) of articles to match their world views. According a SurvivalBlog reader in Switzerland, the following section was deleted from Wikipedia by members of an anti-gun Wikipedia cabal on August 14, 2013. (It had been part of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns article). Never mentioned in the Wikipedia article was the fact that there are charges pending against at least seven other members of their “crime fighting” organization: Marcus Hook Mayor James ‘Jay’ Schiliro - the “furnishing alcohol to a minor” charge was just dropped on a technicality, but he still faces misdemeanor charges of official oppression, recklessly endangering another person, unlawful restraint and false imprisonment, in a bizarre incident where he tried to force a young man to have homosexual relations, at gunpoint.)", 
- 156 word quotation: Fair Use Source: James Wesley, Rawles (“JWR”), Blanket Conservapedia Fair Use Article Citation Authorization "You are certainly welcome to use up to three quotes of 800 words each, in any of your wiki articles." Authorization Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2014 09:46:09 -0700. Idaho, American Redoubt: The Survival Blog, 2015, Online. Amazon.com, Accessed January 5, 2015 Embarrassing Truths: An Example of Why You Shouldn’t Trust Wikipedia http://survivalblog.com/embarrassing_truths_an_example_of_why_you_shouldnt_trust_wikipedia
- Bender, William. Marcus Hook Mayor arrested, seeking re-election. Philly.com.
Temporary 7 Day Ban: WShact again removing Conservative POV material from Survival/Firearm Related Articles
Dear User:Jpatt and User:Karajou, I would appreciate your help on addressing Wshact issue again this since User:Conservative told me to talk to you since he is temporarily busy on off-Wiki related business. Thank you again.
Instead of contributing new material, I again have had to spend significant time restoring the diverse conservative point of view topics/materials that WShact continues to remove/delete/subtly edit out from Category:Survivalism and firearms, Second Amendment related articles. The Survival Blog articles in particular took 30 minutes to restore material deleted by Wshact from his numerous small edits (so they couldn't be easily reverted). I had to spend time removing Wshact's biased (and improperly formatted resulting in a reference error) source/ref from a biased competing commercial website rather than unbiased actual Alexa site reference. http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:The_Survival_Blog#WShact_again_removing_Conservative_POV_material_from_Survival.2FFirearm_Related_Articles TheAmericanRedoubt 06:47, 13 January 2015 (EST)
In re-reviewing Wschact's continued harassment of Survivalism-Prepper-Firearms articles under the guise of making lots of small improvements to the article (which cannot be easily reverted). I realized Wshact, under the guise of reorganizing the article and putting it in the active voice instead of passive voice, has again deleted significant conservative point of view content. It was to hard to continue trying to restore the vandalized article. Thus I had to restore my original version of the article.
Dealing with this whole affair of continued harassment has just cost me 1 hour of my time that I had budgeted to spend contributing new firearms content.
In response to Wshact's continued harassment despite repeated warnings, I am temporarily banning him for 7 days. Admins who have been involved in correcting Wshact's aggressive behavior, please correct the ban time if appropriate. TheAmericanRedoubt 07:11, 13 January 2015 (EST)
Comments from Others
- I unblocked you because I thought you would attempt to get along with the editor who wrote this article (User: TheAmericanRedoubt - often referred to as TAR).
- At this time, I don't have the time or inclination to be a referee. So I would suggest trying to work cooperatively with this editor.
- With that in mind, your terse comment above without explanation is not helpful. Do try to work cooperatively with TAR. Regretfully, due to my prior commitments off wiki, I am not in a position to referee and/or unblock you. You will have to go through admin to do this should this occur. Conservative (talk) 10:32, 1 April 2016 (EDT)
- I was told by TAR that you are User: Wsacht or a member of a wiki that opposes this wiki. I told him that I thought this was not the case. Your terse comment above does not reassure me that TAR was not correct about this matter. You also seem a bit obsessed with TARs past editing. Again, I don't have the time or inclination to be a referee. Do your best to get along with TAR. I have told TAR to improve in some matters too (please see his talk page). Conservative (talk) 10:39, 1 April 2016 (EDT)