User talk:Aschlafly

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Comment here

Archive Index

Contents

New Jersey ballot propositions

Hi Andy,

I got the sample ballot in the mail for the November election in New Jersey. I was curious if you had a position on the two ballot propositions. Thanks, GregG (talk) 12:02, 30 October 2016 (EDT)

I am very much against the gambling proposition. It's idolatry that wrecks families and communities, and effectively steals from the less informed and less disciplined. Gambling also destroys the mind.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:11, 30 October 2016 (EDT)
Do you have an opinion on Proposition 2? There appears to be a lot of misinformation floating around. I know Bill Spadea of New Jersey 101.5 is strongly opposed to it, but maybe he's misinformed. I was wondering if you had reliable information and an opinion about the proposition. Thanks, GregG (talk) 17:17, 5 November 2016 (EDT)
I support Question 2. It ensures that the proceeds of gas taxes go towards transportation projects, not other things like underfunded pensions or Planned Parenthood. I don't know why any conservative would oppose Question 2. ht does Bill Spadea say?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:12, 5 November 2016 (EDT)
Here's a video of Spadea explaining his opposition as well as a caller's opposition. What I understood the gist of Spadea's argument to be is that the proposition doesn't actually dedicate funds to transportation, and that defeating the proposition would force the legislature to roll back the gas tax hikes. In other words, he believes the proposition is a misleadingly described Trojan horse (which, to be sure, is not unprecedented). But these kinds of issues are outside my field of expertise, so that's why I wanted to know how a conservative should vote on these issues. GregG (talk) 18:50, 6 November 2016 (EST)
It looks like the casino proposition has been resoundingly defeated. Proposition 2 still looks rather close. Trump is also doing much better than I had anticipated. GregG (talk) 22:30, 8 November 2016 (EST)
I think the worry with Proposition 2 was the fear of embezzlement with the proceeds. Either that or just general annoyance with another increase of taxes they don't feel like putting up with. Also Christie raised the tax on gas the month before.
My opposition to Proposition 1 was partly that I felt we already have enough gambling addicts attracted to South Jersey, we don't need more. But Atlantic County has already lost thousands of jobs and has one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. Take a ride outside Atlantic County and see all the businesses closed. The financial market here is slowly being destroyed, and by adding North Jersey Casinos it will only raise taxes in North Jersey to support the southern counties that all depend on casinos. It's not just the citizens that live in Atlantic County that are negatively affected, it will harm all of us. --KommissarReb (talk) 8:48, 6 January 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for your superb points.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:37, 6 January 2017 (EST)

Archive 60

--AugustO (talk) 07:22, 20 November 2016 (EST)

Calming of the Storm - eight month later

Andy, it took you eight months to delete the factually false statement But "λέγω" -- the Greek term used for said in some versions -- does not appear in the Greek above from your Essay:Calming the Storm. Now I have given you another eight months to acknowledge that according to Mark, Jesus spoke to the storm aloud. But I understand that you were very preoccupied with the election: It is very unfortunate that your mother wasn't able to see Trump's ultimate triumph to which she had contributed so much - I want to express my belate condolences for your loss.


1) If you view Mark 4:39 (καὶ διεγερθεὶς ἐπετίμησεν τῷ ἀνέμῳ καὶ εἶπεν τῇ θαλάσσῃ Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο. καὶ ἐκόπασεν ὁ ἄνεμος, καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη μεγάλη.) in isolation, you may be allowed to try various, even anachronistic meanings of λέγω. But your proposals ("lay", to "cause to lie down," or to "put to sleep") don't work grammatically. Confer the Iliad, 14th book, verse 252 where Homer uses λέγω in this sense:

[...]ἐγὼ μὲν ἔλεξα Διὸς νόον[...] (I, indeed, laid to rest the mind of Zeus)

Here, you see, that λέγω in the sense of laying is a transitive verb and requires an accusative (νόον), while in Mark 4:39 you have a dative object (τῇ θαλάσσῃ). For short, your preferred meaning cannot be reconciled with the actual grammar.

2) If you view Mark 4:39 in context of the Gospel of Mark - and even the New Testament - it becomes clear that the only feasible translation of this verse is something like " [...]He said to the sea: "Silence, be still"): Mark uses the verb λέγω in 190 of his 678 verses, most often as the sequence

[form of λέγω][addressed person as dative object][direct speech]

You can see this e.g. in Mark 4:38-41:

38καὶ αὐτὸς ἦν ἐν τῇ πρύμνῃ ἐπὶ τὸ προσκεφάλαιον καθεύδων· καὶ ἐγείρουσιν αὐτὸν καὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ Διδάσκαλε, οὐ μέλει σοι ὅτι ἀπολλύμεθα; 39καὶ διεγερθεὶς ἐπετίμησεν τῷ ἀνέμῳ καὶ εἶπεν τῇ θαλάσσῃ Σιώπα, πεφίμωσο. καὶ ἐκόπασεν ὁ ἄνεμος, καὶ ἐγένετο γαλήνη μεγάλη. 40καὶ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τί δειλοί ἐστε; οὔπω ἔχετε πίστιν; 41καὶ ἐφοβήθησαν φόβον μέγαν, καὶ ἔλεγον πρὸς ἀλλήλους Τίς ἄρα οὗτός ἐστιν ὅτι καὶ ὁ ἄνεμος καὶ ἡ θάλασσα ὑπακούει αὐτῷ;

Here, in this short section, Mark uses the same construction four times (out of 190...). Do you really think that one time he just wants to express the opposite meaning to the other three times?

I'd like to hear your thoughts. --AugustO (talk) 09:08, 20 November 2016 (EST)

Let's take a look at the Gospel of Mark

I'm going to list the occurrences of the verb λέγω in the Gospel of Mark to demonstrate that he used this verb exclusively to indicate speaking. Therefore, the statement

But the real meaning of "λέγω" is to "lay", to "cause to lie down," or to "put to sleep." It has a connotation of speaking only when used in a context of verbal communication such as putting an argument to rest, which is not the case here in observing nature.

is at best misleading and should be removed from Essay:Calming the Storm. --AugustO (talk)


August, your exegesis is extraordinary!!! But as before, you are being too literal. Mark was not on the boat. He was a child being homeschooled by a woman disciple of Jesus. If someone wrote that Trump told himself to be more politically correct, then that would not mean that he actually verbalized those words, right?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:42, 24 November 2016 (EST)
Thanks. It seems that we - at last agree - at something: Mark describes a verbal command of Jesus to the sea.
You may say that he got this wrong. But to do so, you have to disavow what he has literally written. For doing so, you should have a very good reasons, as the danger of cherry-picking the Gospel arises! Mark wasn't there, but you weren't there neither: why should your insights trump his report? Just because it neatly fits your ideas of quantum mechanics - which may or may not be true?
Generally, I find it easier to argue in accordance with scripture than in contrast to it.
As for your example: Mark wasn't a MSM journalist, and Trump is not Jesus. Trump may be inspirational, but Mark was inspired.
--AugustO (talk) 03:00, 25 November 2016 (EST)
But I think you're being too literal, August. The issue is whether Mark's ostensible reference to a verbal command could mean something more abstract. If, as someone who was not there, declared that "Trump told himself he would never do that again," then that should be interpreted to mean that Trump thought that, not that he verbally said it. If, as someone who was there, declared the same thing, then a translation as a verbal instruction would be more appropriate.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:17, 25 November 2016 (EST)
  • Your example is lacking context - and that's what this section is all about. You seem to view the verse in isolation: Mark uses λέγω in all of his verses to indicate a verbal communication - e.g., the command to a demon.
  • Luke, Mark and Matthew all describe the reaction of the crew: in all three gospels the verb ὑπακούω is used - the storm obeyed (in the sense of listening to a command). The crew never marvels that Jesus had just to look at the storm, the crew always admires the spoken command.
  • Mark could have used a verb like ὁράω to describe that Jesus just had to observe the storm by looking at it - it's quite a common verb in the Bible, too. He didn't.
  • All this makes it clear that Mark (and Luke and Matthew) report spoken commands to the storm. Perhaps it hasn't happened that way, but than you have to argue against the obvious translation of scripture!

--AugustO (talk) 19:52, 25 November 2016 (EST)

Featured articles

Do we still do featured articles? There are a few that I'd like to nominate. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2016 (EST)

Nominations are welcome! Ideally, they should have popularity and influence. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:57, 23 November 2016 (EST)

Protection capability problems

Hello Mr. Schlafly, I found out today that the protection capabilities that I have only protect articles and images only so autoconfirmed users can edit them. Problem is, as I'm sure you can tell, every registered Conservapedia user is autoconfirmed, even vandals, thus making this capability useless. Is there any way you could change this capability so that it means something? Lately I have been trying to protect all images that I uploaded or requested to be uploaded per our image protection policy. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:17, 22 November 2016 (EST)

I have the same issue. It seems there is a limited number of levels which can be protected to. Since we can't out-protect ourselves (prevent ourselves from editing a page) it seems that the only level that we can protect to is autoconfirmed. --David B (TALK) 21:38, 22 November 2016 (EST)

Prediction

You'll unperson Trump as a RINO within two years. I was just saving you some work. Get ahead of the curve now, and you might even be able to spin it as Conservapedia Proven Right. JohnZ (talk) 19:47, 23 November 2016 (EST)

Appreciate your humor, John. So far Trump looks more conservative than even Ronald Reagan was. Hopefully that will continue. Happy Thanksgiving Day.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2016 (EST)
If you read the Book of Proverbs, you will see that Solomon was very conservative. And he had 700 wives and 300 concubines. :) Conservative (talk) 21:50, 23 November 2016 (EST)

Popular French website wrote an article on Conservapedia. About 40% of Conservapedia's traffic is now overseas

The popular French website Telerama (which is one of the top 5,200 websites in the world in web traffic and one of France's top 250 websites in popularity) did a recent article on Conservapedia located HERE.

Here is an excerpt from the article (translated via Google translate):

"Onservapedia is fast becoming a benchmark in the ultra-conservative sphere in the United States and today has more than 100,000 records and 581 million page views since its inception. The most read, besides the homepage, the one on the "homosexual agenda", atheism, Barack Obama, Adolf Hitler, and ... Wikipedia. The ascent of Donald Trump has shed new light on the site, which is often cited in the conservative Glenn Beck radio show, and is referenced on many pro-Republican websites, convinced that all mainstream and Internet media In general are leagued against conservative ideas. More worrying, Conservapedia is still used as a working tool at Eagle Forum University, an online education program created by the conservative and creationist lobby of Phyllis Schlafly."[1]

The Atheism and suicide article may have hit an emotional hot button for that Frnechman given its prominence in the Telerama article (picture atop Telerama article, citing of the article).

According to two popular web traffic analysis websites, about 40% of Conservapedia's traffic now comes from outside the USA. Conservative (talk) 17:29, 25 November 2016 (EST)

Newsfeed

It doesn't seem like you intended to delete all this info at the bottom of the newsfeed [2]. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:11, 29 November 2016 (EST)

Great catch! I restored it, except for one headline that was intentionally trimmed. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2016 (EST)

Fair use?

File:Sanger Euthenasia Society.jpg

Yes. Great discovery!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2016 (EST)
Andy, these are from CSPAN so there should not be any issues, but it is still your call. Pictures of Burnham are exceedingly rare.
James Burnham 1.jpg
James Burnham 2.jpg
Should be fine. Thanks for asking.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:33, 9 January 2017 (EST)

Fake News

Mr. Schlafly, would you please add the information I added today on Fake News to the news feed? This is big news, and it shows that liberals are responsible for the "fake news" hysteria. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:50, 8 December 2016 (EST)

Thank you! --1990'sguy (talk) 19:54, 8 December 2016 (EST)
It is a great story. Thank you!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2016 (EST)
You're welcome. I should note, however, that PeterKa was the one who originally brought the article up on the main talk page. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:02, 8 December 2016 (EST)

Would you please add a link to Fake News in the newsfeed entry? --1990'sguy (talk) 10:45, 9 December 2016 (EST)

Link added - great suggestion!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:26, 9 December 2016 (EST)

St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre

Is there a way to move the article back to its former page and still show me as having created it? I didn't know the article already existed and I put a lot of work into it. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:25, 28 December 2016 (EST)

While we're at it, can we PLEASE rewrite the article to be more neutral towards Catholics? The way it's written makes it seem as though they deliberately tried to commit the holocaust on the Hugenauts, when in reality it was simply a means to drive out the Hugenauts that had invaded via a specific battle plan, but because they had to rely on the bells of a church for signals, it gave mixed signals and the populace misinterpreted the signs as indicating they should kill more. In fact, the Pope at the time when he learned of this ended up crying when he learned how much blood was shed. Remember, this was before digital GPS watches and instantaneous media was the norm. Quite frankly, making the Catholics sound like Nazis in that article is flat out unacceptable, speaking as a Catholic. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:19, 28 December 2016 (EST)
First off, I mentioned that several Roman Catholics actually helped the Huguenots. Second, do you have a reliable source that states that the Pope cried? The Encyclopedia Britannica states that the Pope struck a medal to commemorate the killings (here it is: File:Medal.GIF). Other Roman Catholic leaders also celebrated the event. Also, I think the article makes clear that the French leaders only intended to kill the Huguenot leaders. Also, the sources I cite are actually neutral, with the exception of Reformation.org, and I only cite that source for relatively uncontroversial facts between Catholics and Protestants. Lastly, I've noticed that numerous Conservapedia articles have a Roman Catholic bias, such as the ones that Dataclarifier has edited (I think he is a great editor despite that bias, so don't interpret this mention as being against him). --1990'sguy (talk) 19:38, 28 December 2016 (EST)
I don't know about his crying (I'll have to ask the person I found this out from), but I can tell you that New Advent had stated that Gregory XIII specifically refusing to receive Maurevel and Pius V specifically denounced the "intrigues" that led to the event (referring to Maurevel assassinating Coligny). You can read that bit up here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/13333b.htm Pokeria1 (talk) 19:42, 28 December 2016 (EST)
Thank you. Please clarify and elaborate what you mean when you stated above that the planned massacre "was simply a means to drive out the Hugenauts that had invaded via a specific battle plan." Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:53, 28 December 2016 (EST)
Okay, to answer both that and your question about the pope crying, I can tell you it was on 278 and 292-293 of the book Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church: A 2,000-Year History by H.W. Crocker III. Pokeria1 (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2016 (EST)
Thank you. Is there any way I can see the pages from my computer? Also, what about my second question? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:19, 28 December 2016 (EST)
I... thought I answered the second question earlier. But I'll repeat it: "I can tell you it was on 278 and 292-293 of the book Triumph: The Power and the Glory of the Catholic Church: A 2,000-Year History by H.W. Crocker III." As far as seeing the pages on your computer, if you can find an online version of the book, you might have a chance. If not, I suggest you try ordering it from Amazon or eBay. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2016 (EST)
What I meant by "your second statement" was your statement above that the planned massacre "was simply a means to drive out the Hugenauts that had invaded via a specific battle plan." Did you mean that it is mentioned in the book? --1990'sguy (talk) 00:08, 29 December 2016 (EST)
Yes, it's in the book, specifically on pages 292-3. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:41, 29 December 2016 (EST)

Captcha questions

User:Amorrow makes a good point that "What is the next year?" answer should now be 2018. It is probably time to change the question or the answer or both. Thanks, JDano (talk) 19:09, 5 January 2017 (EST)

I updated it a few days ago. What's the date on User:Amorrow's suggestion? I don't see it on my talk page. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:58, 5 January 2017 (EST)

Images

Mr. Schlafly, would you please add Category:Donald Trump to these protected images?

Here:

Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:44, 6 January 2017 (EST)

Thank you for adding the category to the images. Would you also please add the paragraph I added (in two separate edits) on Racism to Hate crime, as the latter is protected? Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2017 (EST)
Unprotected Hate crime to you edit as you think best! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:02, 6 January 2017 (EST)

Wikify

Would you please wikify Matt Bevin on the newsfeed? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:47, 9 January 2017 (EST)

Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:31, 9 January 2017 (EST)

Before and After templates

Hi, Andy! After a long absence, I'm back and working on the occasional political article and (fun, fun, fun!) more date calculation templates. --Ed Poor Talk 11:27, 15 January 2017 (EST)

Wonderful, Ed. You are the master of the templates!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:47, 15 January 2017 (EST)

Edit request

Hello Mr. Schlafly, would you please review my two edit requests I posted on Talk:Main Page? --1990'sguy (talk) 09:56, 18 January 2017 (EST)

I unprotected the two entries so that you can make the edits as you think best. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:29, 18 January 2017 (EST)
Thank you. If you think these two articles will be vulnerable to vandalism, you can protect them again, as I do not think I will have any more plans to edit them in the near future. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:19, 18 January 2017 (EST)

Mr. Schlafly, would it be OK if I add this sentence to the top of the article Abortion so it is the second sentence of the article? Objectively and logically speaking, it is a form of murder<ref>Taylor, Paul F (May 2, 2014). [https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/abortion/is-it-really-a-matter-of-life-and-death/ Chapter 12: Abortion: Is It Really a Matter of Life and Death?]. ''Answers in Genesis'' (from ''The New Answers Book 3''). Retrieved January 22, 2017.</ref> as well as child sacrifice.<ref>Ham, Ken (October 26, 2015). [https://answersingenesis.org/sanctity-of-life/abortion/abortion-and-child-sacrifice/ Abortion and Child Sacrifice]. ''Answers in Genesis''. Retrieved January 22, 2017.</ref> --1990'sguy (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2017 (EST)

I think that could be added towards the end of the article. Many people think that use of the term "murder" is not helpful in persuading people to be pro-life, so the term would be problematic as part of the introduction.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:19, 23 January 2017 (EST)
Would you please add it where you see fit? Also, if the article should not call it murder at the top, then what is your opinion of Abortion arguments? In addition to this, would you please take a look at Template talk:USPresidents? Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2017 (EST)
The provocative term is better suited to an entry entitled "abortion arguments," which will tend to attract people who want to argue, rather than "abortion", which has a more general audience. I'll look for a suitable place to include the expression. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:16, 23 January 2017 (EST)

Mr. Schlafly, would you please add Donald Trump to Template:USPresidents? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2017 (EST)

News feed

The number arrested in the anti-Trump protests has reached 217.[3] Would you please update the news feed? Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:59, 20 January 2017 (EST)

Corrected, thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:37, 20 January 2017 (EST)

Pope

Andy, could you take a look at the article on the pope? The current version reads a little bit like evangelical propaganda ... --AugustO (talk) 02:59, 23 January 2017 (EST)

Page moves

There is a backlog of page move requests. The most recent is that we need to move Alternatiave Facts‎ to Alternative facts. Thanks, JDano (talk) 07:06, 28 January 2017 (EST)

I was actually just about to request this move myself. Also, would you please delete Donald Trump's political achievements, which is a botched and useless redirect? --1990'sguy (talk) 12:25, 28 January 2017 (EST)
Opps. I got it misspelled now. Alternatiave facts. I should have just left it alone, sorry. RobSMake Exxon Great Again 12:47, 28 January 2017 (EST)

European migrant crisis

Can I get some help with a link from the Main Page to European migrant crisis. It's got 7000 hits in three weeks and Google doesn't even have it ranked yet.

This article is extremely important. What was the purpose of America saving Europe twice in the 20th century, only to stand idly by in the 21st century while its overrun by Muslim rapists and its people Islamified by intimidation? European & American mainstream news are censoring facts as "fake news", a replay of the US elections in the upcoming French and German elections. Furthermore, we have a lot of European readers, and Europeans don't know how to discuss the issues because of their hate speech laws. RobSMake Exxon Great Again 12:32, 29 January 2017 (EST)

Added to Main page left. Thanks for suggesting this.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:53, 29 January 2017 (EST)

Questions/requests

1) Have you found a place to add my proposed addition to Abortion?

2) Would you please delete this broken (and unnecessary) redirect Donald Trump's political achievements?

3) I have some nominations for featured articles:

  • European migrant crisis--this article is already on the main page (as you obviously know), but it is very important and relevant, and featured article status would (hopefully) give it increased visibility as long as it's listed
  • Donald Trump achievements--Trump has done a lot in his first few days, and I've tried to include every relevant action
  • Scott Walker--He's not in the spotlight, but this article does have a high quality, and Walker is arguably the best current governor, and possibly the best (or at least one of the best) in U.S. history.

--1990'sguy (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2017 (EST)

Two more questions/requests:
  • I also nominate Silent majority as a featured article. I have included much information relevant to Donald Trump
  • Would you please review the massive changes made by a new editor on Obama's Religion
Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:42, 30 January 2017 (EST)
Mr. Schlafly, thank you for looking at the Obama's religion article, but would you also please take a look at my other requests? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2017 (EST)
Thanks, I'm working my way through this. Silent majority is an interesting entry -- well done! -- but I wonder about its potential for popularity. The term is a bit obscure and its significance is dubious. The majority, or at least a plurality, voted for Hillary, for example. Let's discuss this further.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:57, 3 February 2017 (EST)
Yes, Clinton won the popular vote, but it was only about 3 million votes out of over 137 million. Also, with all the protests, riots, and MSM bias, one would think 80% of the country opposes Trump, even though a majority of likely voters[4] support the ban. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:05, 3 February 2017 (EST)
If I may interject my concerns, the term "silent majority" was much used by earlier politicians. Any reappropriation for 2016 would invite comparisons to those politicians. This is inappropriate. Thanks, JDano (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2017 (EST)
The article covers not just the term, but also the concept of the silent majority. I have heard mentions of a potential "silent majority" during the election season, but use of the term is not required for talking about the concept. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2017 (EST)
Please check the page Talk:Immigration. I don't even remember the last time I poured my heart out like this. --Pious (talk) 00:49, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
I reverted it. Debts are not inherited and this is an encyclopedia. I donate to charities, like churches, that are experts in handling appeals for assistance. I suggest that you visit a local church or charity and make your appeal in person, where it can be better addressed. Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:54, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
I understand. I have in fact made appeals to churches, and shall refrain from asking financial assistance from this site herein. I should've recognized this is purely an encyclopedia before making my plea. --Pious (talk) 00:58, 20 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for understanding.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:01, 20 May 2017 (EDT)

Delete requests

Hi, I don't want to swamp you with work, but I was wondering if you or someone else could work on deleting some pages. We currently have 19 categories, 57 pages (21 of which are marked "speedy") and 10 files marked for deletion. Most of them are in the Articles proposed for deletion category, but some are also in the Speedy deletion candidates category. Most of them are just taking up space, but some are actually interfering, since they are in the way; several pages need to be moved, but there is already a page at the destination, which needs to be deleted before a move is possible. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 15:35, 3 February 2017 (EST)

Thanks for the gentle edit

Andrew: I wanted to thank you for the gentle edit of my changes to Quantum mechanics. At some other wiki sites, the ethos is corrosive. Such edits would simply be reverted, in part because MediaWiki software makes that action so easy. My changes were prompted by the use of the definite article "the" to start the second sentence of the page. While Heisenberg's uncertainty principle, introduced first in 1927, is a dramatic moment of progress in the subject, Planck defined his constant in 1900 and and Einstein uses it in his 1905 paper to provide the accepted explanation for the photoelectric effect. Bohr and Rutherford in 1913 proposed the electron orbital structure of the atom. de Broglie in his 1924 PhD thesis postulated the wave nature of electrons and suggested that all matter has wave properties. This is an example of wave–particle duality. Many other great minds were at work. Huh. I recall there being a dramatic video presentation of the personal struggle Heisenberg went through around the time that he made his great insight. I cannot find it at the moment, but if I find it, I will point it out to you. There are, of course, other dramas and plays involving him during the period of WW II, but the one I am thinking of is a more personal one in that Werner Heisenberg was in his mind struggling in June 1925 to advance human knowledge and perhaps for his own sort of immortality.--Amorrow (talk) 23:17, 3 February 2017 (EST)

Special:BookSources

I noticed that you have the default for this page. I know it is a little tricky to update, but you might want to a least add a Google Book link to it. The documentation for it starts at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:ISBN . If you feel energetic, you might want to try, for example, this simple expansion: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Special:BookSources/1572591536 .--Amorrow (talk) 14:05, 5 February 2017 (EST)

Oh, I noticed that MediaWiki:Booksources declares that it is deleted but it still reports content on the page. I do not know if that puts the software in a strange state.--Amorrow (talk) 14:09, 5 February 2017 (EST)
Oh, I got what want. I created Conservapedia:Book sources. I do not think that any of those sources have any political slant. You can verify with, say, ISBN 0-393-03891-2 .--Amorrow (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2017 (EST)
The way that this is done on other wikis is that Conservapedia joins as an Amazon Associate and gets a referral code. The Conservapedia:Book sources page would then be modified so that any search out to Amazon would include the referral code. In this manner, Conservapedia would get a 4 to 6% commission on any resulting sales. Thanks, JDano (talk) 20:11, 15 February 2017 (EST)

Your data

Should Andrew Schlafly begin with "Andrew Layton Schlafly (born April 27, 1961)" or is that inappropriate? I am charmed that we have the same given Biblical name. I was born July 25, 1961. Please remove this message if I have erred.--Amorrow (talk) 00:19, 6 February 2017 (EST)

calculus

User:Amorrow/Calculus I. It is just an attempt to provide the student with a compass so that they do not get lost in the sea of new ideas that flood their mind when they attack the textbook.--Amorrow (talk) 00:22, 6 February 2017 (EST)

Oh, please look at this request. It seems to require your personal attention. It is a minor error, but it would nice if it could be fixed.--Amorrow (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2017 (EST)
If that is too much trouble, then: File:Log.png This page reports: "This page has been locked to prevent editing." The image has an error in its legend: the red and blue lines are incorrectly switched with each other. I have a corrected version of this image, but this locking prevents the regular admins from updating it. Please unlock the image. Thanks.--Amorrow (talk) 00:33, 8 February 2017 (EST)

Upload and Move

If you have found my work to be trustworthy, it would save other people a lot of time if I were allowed to upload images and to move pages on my own. Many thanks for your consideration. JDano (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2017 (EST)

There are still a large number of backlogged move requests. Thanks, JDano (talk) 08:40, 23 February 2017 (EST)
Many thanks, JDano (talk) 16:43, 5 March 2017 (EST)

Another question of fair use

This is an example of one of several race-based advertisements during the 2014 senate race, one of the nastiest any of us have ever seen. http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Thad-mailer.jpg

Yes, that is fair use.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:31, 15 February 2017 (EST)

Quick project

Our state articles include a list of US House and Senate members and their infoboxes include contact information for the Senators. Much of this information needs to be updated to reflect the 2016 election. Several editors are undertaking a state-by-state review that is being organized at: Conservapedia:Community Portal#Political directory. Because there are 50 articles to update, we need an all-hands-on-deck approach to staffing this project, and your participation would set an powerful example that would encourage other editors to help out. It would mean a lot if you could update a state from the list. Many thanks, JDano (talk) 20:05, 15 February 2017 (EST)

re: news on the main page

Probably due to the growth of right-wing politics in Europe, Conservapedia has been gaining some productive European editors.

Consider adding more right-wing news related to Europe on the main page news feed. If you don't follow European news closely, perhaps the new European editors could suggest some stories to post on the main page.

Although I do not following French/Netherlands politics closely, the recent news about Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen that I posted on the main page combined with Brexit, tells me that there could be a big outbreak of greater free speech in Europe and a significant rightward movement in politics. Both France and the Netherlands are very liberal.

What I see happening is that post internet/social media, governments and the mainstream press are having less influence over their citizens.

It really surprised me how fast liberalism has been crumbling lately. Many times in life when things begin to unravel, the unraveling starts happening faster and faster.

Long term, I think think the Christianization happening in the world is forcing societies/governments in the West to be more efficient as this is causing many developing countries to be more productive/competitive (see: The Protestant Work Ethic: Alive & Well…In China The Protestant Work Ethic: Alive & Well…In China and Global Christianity. Conservative (talk) 13:23, 20 February 2017 (EST)

I completely agree with Cons. We should add more European news items. BTW, Switzerland's largest political party is the solid right-wing Swiss People's Party, which has virtually the same views as the Tea Party Movement and President Donald Trump. Despite the fact that it has had huge victories for the past 25 years, it gained another massive victory in late 2015. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:14, 20 February 2017 (EST)
I question how conservative some of the European parties have been in the past. But they are becoming increasingly conservative now.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:16, 20 February 2017 (EST)
It depends on the party. However, all of the right-wing parties do oppose the EU and other parties that are even more liberal than they themselves could be. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:27, 20 February 2017 (EST)
@Andy, because of Europe's fuedal past, and the US's lack of it, the meaning of "conservative" can be very different by US standards. For the most part "conservative" in Europe for 70 years would be considered anti-union business interests. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 19:31, 20 February 2017 (EST)

It would be great to get some Swiss editors. Gun toting, Bible believing, Swiss conservatives. :)

If Europe keeps moving to the right, perhaps we can persuade Andy to have a new logo for Conservapedia. :)Conservative (talk)

There is definitely a hunger out there. And Europe's problems are twofold: (1) an incredibly biased media with the upcoming French, Dutch, and German elections, just like we saw here in 2016; (2) restrictive hate speech laws unlike anything we would tolerate here, which include, as in Sweden, condemning politicians who voted for open immigration laws. RobSCIA vs Trump. Who's gonna win? 22:07, 20 February 2017 (EST)

Image upload request

Hi, I've been starting a couple aviation articles here, but quality images of certain aircraft types and logos are lacking. You seem to be in charge here, so could you upload:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Raif_Badawi_cropped.jpg (Raif Badawi is a political prisoner in Saudi Arabia)

Uploaded as File:Raif Badawi cropped.jpg --David B (TALK) 15:20, 4 March 2017 (EST)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asif_EHYD_2.jpg (Asif Mohiuddin is a Bangladeshi blogger who was violently attacked by militant islamists but survived)

Uploaded as File:Asif EHYD 2.jpg --David B (TALK) 15:20, 4 March 2017 (EST)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Skyteam_Logo_Alliance.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:American_Airlines_logo_2013.svg

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Star_Alliance_Logo.svg/1280px-Star_Alliance_Logo.svg.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Oneworld_logo.svg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Southwest_737-700_N785SW.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EM_N736SA_(2766338093).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Southwest_737-700_N913WN.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Southwest_Airlines_logo_2014.svg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JetBlue_Airways_Logo.svg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JetBlue_Airways,_N935JB,_Airbus_A321-231_(19994390048).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JetBlue_Airways,_N566JB,_Airbus_A320-232_(19993334538).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:JetBlue_Airways,_N355JB_(20186999471).jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Emirates_logo.svg (Controversial flag-carrier airline)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Emirates_Airbus_A380_(A6-EDS)_departs_London_Heathrow_11April2015.jpg (Largest A380 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_777-31H-ER,_Emirates_AN1630451.jpg (Other plane in Emirates fleet, Largest 777 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Singapore_Airlines_Airbus_A380-841;_9V-SKJ@ZRH;16.04.2011_595cc_(5629408416).jpg (A380 launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A380_26.jpg (A380 in Airbus livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:F-GUGK@LHR_16AUG12_(8416701090).jpg (Largest A318 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:EM_FRONTIER_A318_(2529447611).jpg (A318 Launch customer)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyJet#/media/File:EasyJet_logo.svg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:G-EZBW_Airbus_A319-111_A319_EZY_(neue_Bemalung)_(16000999414).jpg (Largest A319 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HB-IPU_1_A319-112_Swissair_ZRH_20MAR99_(5805828730).jpg (A319 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:IndiGo_Airbus_A320neo_F-WWDG_(to_VT-ITI)_(28915135713).jpg (Largest A320neo operator)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airbus_A320neo_family#/media/File:Lufthansa_Airbus_A320_neo_D-AINA,_The_world%27s_first_A320_neo_(24705951566).jpg (A320neo launch customer) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Airbus_Industrie_A321neo_D-AVXA_(29428329122).jpg (A321neo prototype)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:9M-AQG_(30856774155).jpg (Largest A320 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:F-WWAI_A320-131_Airbus_Industrie(prototype)_FAB_SEP88_(13753510323).jpg (A320 prototype)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BWI_Logo.svg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BWI_airport_terminal.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BWI.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nashville_International_Airport_Logo.svg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Boston_Logan_International_Airport_Logo.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Diagram_BOS_Airport.pdf

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ronald_Reagan_Washington_National_Airport_Logo.png

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:DCA_Airport_diagram.pdf

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Delta_logo.svg/1280px-Delta_logo.svg.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N954AT_(15246599649).jpg (Largest Boeing 717 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N954AT_Boeing_B.717_Air_Tran_(9193031855).jpg (Boeing 717 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_707-321B(Adv),_Pan_Am_JP6997462.jpg (Boeing 707 Launch Customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_707-131B,_Trans_World_Airlines_(TWA)_JP5932479.jpg (Boeing 707 largest operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_727-22C,_United_Airlines_AN0998024.jpg (One of the two Boeing 727 launch customers)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_727-254,_Eastern_Air_Lines_JP5964327.jpg (One of the two Boeing 727 launch customers)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lufthansa_Boeing_737-100_in_Zurich_1981.jpg (Launch customer of the Boeing 737)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ba_b747-400_g-bnle_arp.jpg (Largest operator of the Boeing 747 at the moment)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pan_Am_Boeing_747_at_Zurich_Airport_in_May_1985.jpg (Boeing 747 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:KLM_747_(7491686916).jpg (The KLM 747 involved the the Tenerife accident)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_757-225,_Eastern_Air_Lines_AN0079357.jpg (Boeing 757 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Delta_Air_Lines_B757-351_N586NW_LAX.jpg (Largest Boeing 757 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_767-332ER(w)_%27N1610D%27_Delta_(14145000498).jpg (Largest Boeing 767 operator)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N647UA_Boeing_B.763_UNITED_(13895459883).jpg (Boeing 767 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_767-400ER_Rollout_Proctor.jpg (Boeing 767 at Everett factory)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_Airlines_-_N222UA_(6907351041).jpg (Boeing 777 Launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:All_Nippon_Airways_Boeing_787-9_(JA884A)_at_Tokyo_Haneda_Airport.jpg (Boeing 787 largest and launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RA-89005_Sukhoi_SSJ.100-95B_Aeroflot_in_Skyteam_C-s_(7971252854).jpg (Sukhoi Superjet)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Aerom%C3%A9xico_Boeing_767-200ER_XA-JBC_CDG_2010-4-5.png (Aeromexico in SkyTeam livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_777-300ER_Air_France_(AFR)_%22Skyteam_livery%22_F-GZNE_-_MSN_37432_790_(5096229884).jpg (Air France in SkyTeam livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N844MH_(6942190917).jpg (Delta in SkyTeam livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Korean_Air_Boeing_777-200ER_HL7733_AMS_2011-10-15.png (Korean Air in SkyTeam livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N343AN_(15390956166).jpg (American Airlines in Oneworld livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_777-367(ER)_Cathay_Pacific_Airways_BKPL,_HKG_Hong_Kong_(Chek_Lap_Kok_International_Airport),_Hong_Kong_PP1281783332.jpg (Cathay Pacific in Oneworld)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_747-400_British_AW_(BAW)_%22One_World_livery%22_G-CIVK_-_MSN_25818_1104_(5455648928).jpg (British Airways in Oneworld)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:VH-OJU_%27Lord_Howe_Island%27_OneWorld_Logo-jet_Boeing_747-438_Qantas_(6600558667).jpg (Qantas in Oneworld)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A7-ALA_(19397355348).jpg (Airbus A350 largest and launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Thai_Airways_International_Airbus_A330-300;_HS-TEL@BKK;30.07.2011_613ez_(6042416350).jpg (Thai in Star Alliance livery) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SAS_B737_(5820738887).jpg (SAS in Star Alliance livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:D-AILF_Airbus_A.319_Lufthansa_in_Star_Alliance_Colours_(8633498953).jpg (Lufthansa in Star Alliance)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N14120_(26038860503).jpg (United in Star Alliance Livery)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_767-333ER_%27C-FMWY%27_Air_Canada_(14247086054).jpg (Air Canada in Star Alliance)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10-10,_American_Airlines_JP5931060.jpg (American Airlines flight 191 plane)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10-10,_American_Airlines_AN0217682.jpg (American DC-10, launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10_(FedEx_Express)_(4269676839).jpg (Fedex DC-10, largest user)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:McDonnell_Douglas_DC-10-10,_Turkish_Airlines_AN1815013.jpg (Turkish Airlines 981 plane)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:McDonnell_Douglas_MD-11,_Finnair_JP5879069.jpg (MD-11 launch customer)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:FedEx_MD-11F(N526FE)_(3382499520).jpg (largest MD-11 user, Fedex flight 80 plane)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swissair_Flight_111#/media/File:28as_-_Swissair_MD-11;_HB-IWF@ZRH;14.07.1998_(4713082874).jpg (SwissAir 111 plane)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N334AA_B767-223ER_American_MAN_08APR01_(6839074488).jpg (American Airlines 11 plane)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Boeing_767-222,_United_Airlines_AN0188143.jpg (United 175 plane)

http://www.airport-data.com/aircraft/photo/000205906.html (American 77 plane)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:N591UA.jpg (United flight 93 plane) Sorry to ask so much, no rush.

By the way, I'm fixing the Tenerife Airport Disaster article because it says the primary cause was poor English, despite a consensus of the International board responsible for the investigation deemed pilot error the primary cause (only the Dutch members of the board stated language was an issue, I'll get to conflict of interest later). The Dutch said the controllers couldn't speak English well (despite post-crash interveiws as part of the investigation demonstrating their English was sufficient) because they needed a reason to explain why the KLM plane took off when it did, which was the captain being in a hurry to get to the destination despite warnings from fellow drew members. The Dutch government still has a 6% stake in KLM, hence they would not point responsibility at themselves (costing millions in damages) so they blamed ATC's english. Both the Spanish and American investigators agreed radio interference and static was a minor factor because it impeded granting permission to take off delaying enough for fog to arrive, resulting in poor visiblity (the KLM pilot did not see the Pan Am plane b/c the fog); but the conclusion was the primary cause was KLM taking off without permission.--IluvAviation (talk) 14:29, 4 March 2017 (EST)

That's quite a list! I'll try to help out by grabbing a few of them when I get the chance. By the way, there is a designated page for requests, named Conservapedia:Image upload requests. Cheers! --David B (TALK) 15:20, 4 March 2017 (EST)
I am considering granting IluvAviation upload rights for the above images. But proper attribution is necessary on some of them. They are not all in the public domain. Any thoughts on this, DavidB4? Thanks for your help.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2017 (EST)
She's new here, but seems to know what she is doing--I wouldn't be opposed to her getting that right. However, I'm willing to do them myself as time allows. I just don't have a lot of time at the moment, so it'll take me a little while to get through the list. If you grant her that right, I can certainly be available for questions, and I can also check on some of her uploads for a bit to make sure there aren't any problems. As well as ensuring that attribution is correct, I would appreciate it if proper categories were assigned also. Maybe I'm obsessed, but it seems we have a lot of images which do not have any categories, and many of them are protected so they cannot be categorized.
On a side note, it's up to you, but I also would not be opposed to JDano getting that right also, as he requested. I've never had a problem with his requests. I can keep uploading for him--I don't mind--but I think he can be trusted. Of course, that decision is up to you as well. --David B (TALK) 19:57, 4 March 2017 (EST)
Thanks for your response. If you can help review the uploads after they are done by these two users, then I'm fine with granting them uploading privileges. The most important thing to look for is proper attribution under the CC or other licenses, unless the image is in the public domain. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2017 (EST)
No problem, and thanks for yours. I can't guarantee I'll catch every upload, but I can certainly keep an eye on new uploads, and watch for anything done incorrectly. --David B (TALK) 21:30, 4 March 2017 (EST)

ValuJet+Sabretech

According to the NTSB (not a regulatory agency, just a small toothless agency that serves as a secondary court of appeals for members of the aviation industry, but primarily investigates accidents that fall under federal jurisdiction [usually aviation accidents]. After the ValuJet accident when everyone was so shocked that simlar accidents had happened, with oxygen generators, and class D cargo hold fires, Congress publically grilled the FAA on C-SPAN) english was not a factor in the accident. In fact, the word "english does not come up once in the accident full report. Aircraft mechanics do not load materials onto aircraft, (that is the role of baggage handlers), they perform routine replacements and repairs on aircraft. The fault lies entirely with:

1. Sabretech, because they did not properly label the oxygen generators as hazardous. Nor did they provide the proper plastic "pins" that connect to the lanyard on the generator to prevent it from "popping" and going off from the slightest movement (like a plane taking off). Oxygen generators can get very hot, they were not packed with proper heat shields. (Oxygen generators mounted in aircraft cabins have such safety caps to prevent accidental deployment and have heat shields to prevent to surrounding cabin from igniting.

2. ValuJet, for knowingly shipping loaded oxygen generators but writing on the cargo manifest that the generators were empty canisters. (If they are empty they are safe--they would then just be a steel canister. The crew was not a fault b/c the manifest declared the generators as empty canisters, not generators; which the baggage handlers knew was wrong gathered from later statements.)

3. ValuJet, for repackaging the generators in bubble wrap, in layers of cardboard, next to a tire in a class D cargo hold that contained neither fire detection systems nor fire suppressant systems.

4. The baggage handlers, for putting blatantly false information on the cargo manifest. (ValuJet pilots that weren't on the flight testified that if Captain Kubeck knew the she never would have taken off, she had a reputation for being incredibly safety conscious.)

5. The FAA for permitting highly hazardous oxygen generators on commercial aircraft, especially in class D cargo holds which did not have detection systems nor fire suppressant systems. At time time putting oxygen generators in the cargo holds of commercial aircraft, even class D cargo holds, (whose only defense against fire is being airtight. After AA123 the FAA stated any fire in a class D cargo hold should burn itself out, but they were ignoring the common event of oxygen generators defeat the purpose, and a fire in a class D cargo hold happened again.) Oxygen generators already had precedent for completely destroying commercial aircraft. Ten years before the ValuJet crash, an American Trans Air McDonnell Douglas DC-10 parked at Chicago O'Hare International Airport burst into flames (the aircraft was completely destroyed, nobody died because a mechanic was inspecting the plane and preparing it for a charter cargo flight when he accidentally set it off. He was able to leave the plane before it was engulfed in flames)

6. The FAA for not following up on the NTSB's recommendation of having fire detection and/or fire suppressant systems in class D cargo holds of commercial aircraft after American Airlines flight 132 (A McDonnell-Douglas MD-80, same family as the McDonnell-Douglas DC-9, just a streched version to hold more passengers). Their reasoning was that a fire in a class D cargo hold was highly unlikely, despite the fact it had happened before: On an American Airlines MD-80, a was started by hazardous highly flammable materials in the class D cargo hold. Unlike ValuJet that plane did not have several dozen grenades with their pins loose--I mean improperly packed oxygen generators , just lots of flammable materials. The pilot manages to make an emergency landing, fortunately the aircraft was not loaded to capacity with passengers or else some would have died when flashover occured. The aircraft had to be written off.

BTW, I'm not arguing on favor of petty regulation like having to register personal drones for flying in your backyard. Just saying precedent shows oxygen generators really don't belong on commercial aircraft, and it is physically possible to have an uncontained fire in a class D cargo hold, as happened multiple times. I believe it would have been better to have learned reinforced cockpit doors are needed to prevent terrorist hijackings from Air France Flight 8969 (1994) and Ethiopian Airlines Flight 961 (1996). (FAA logic: What happens in France and Ethiopia can't possibly happen in the US, right? What's the probability of more suicidal aircraft hijackers attacking the US? September 12th:Maybe reinforced cockpit doors aren't such a bad idea.) Point strong precedent supporting basic safety measures like no oxygen generators on commercial aircraft, smoke detectors in cargo holds, and especially reinforced cockpit doors in the age of terrorism doesn't make me a fascist.

Before you take issue with my edits, I suggest you read the full report here. I read it, and no citation to it was in your original article. The word "english" does not come up once: https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR9706.pdf --IluvAviation (talk) 16:53, 5 March 2017 (EST)

Re: Account promoted

Thanks for the promotion, Andy. Glad to know my efforts made a difference. Northwest (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2017 (EST)

Featured articles

Would you please add Donald Trump achievements, Fake News to the "Featured articles" section of the main page? Both articles have high relevance today. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:25, 6 March 2017 (EST)

Great suggestion! Both of those entries are superb, and I've added them to the featured articles. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:44, 6 March 2017 (EST)
You're welcome. Would you please change the "Featured article" header on the main page to "Featured articles" (pluralizing the "article")? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:47, 6 March 2017 (EST)
Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:57, 6 March 2017 (EST)

Two things

Hello Mr. Schlafly, I appreciate the fact that you put chose to add the shameful arrest of Tim Kaine's son, but why was the "Featured articles" section removed? Would you please restore it?

Also, I appreciate the fact that you and DavidB4 have been adding the license details on our files. I have noticed that many files, including all the ones I uploaded, are unprotected (because we are unable to protect, at least at a meaningful level) in violation of CP's image protection policy. Would you or an admin be able to protect these images? Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2017 (EST)

Featured articles section has been restored as requested. As to the unprotected images, it is OK to leave them unprotected. That enables others to add categories and other information them.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:57, 8 March 2017 (EST)

Image usage violation

Hi, Would you please delete File_talk:Twitter_logo.jpg when you get the chance? The terms of use (see page 2) specifically prohibit displaying older versions of their logo, which this is. Thanks! I've uploaded and used the current logo instead of that one. --David B (TALK) 13:48, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Done as suggested. Thank you!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:57, 9 March 2017 (EST)

Is Genesis History? movie

Is it OK if you would add the article Is Genesis History? to the "Featured articles" section, just for about a week or so? This film is arguably the best movie in support of the young earth view ever created. It features 13 scientists and scholars who have PhDs, many from secular universities, and who have real accomplishments. It's very compelling. If it would be OK, I would like to get the word out about this film before it is shown in Canadian theaters, and while one can order the DVD or Blu-ray of this film.

Unrelated to the first question, would there be any problem with uploading the movie poster of this film? --1990'sguy (talk) 15:45, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Also, would it be OK if I upload the logo of the John Birch Society? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:34, 10 March 2017 (EST)
It is fine to upload the logo and movie poster you describe. I'll consider further your request about promoting the movie. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:23, 11 March 2017 (EST)
I have tried three times to upload the movie poster, but it each time it shows an error in uploading. Is there any way you can help? File:Is Genesis History?.jpg --1990'sguy (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2017 (EST)
There was something odd in the JPG encoding, it seems. I've uploaded it as a PNG here. --David B (TALK) 14:27, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Actually, it was just the question mark in the page name. There's a reason most systems don't allow question marks. File:Is Genesis History.jpg should work fine. --David B (TALK) 14:57, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Thanks for the superb work. Smaller files are preferred. Somehow the size of that poster went from a few hundred kbytes (not too big in size) to well over 1M (this is disfavored) in size. OK this time, let's try to stick to smaller, more efficient uploads in the future. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2017 (EST)
PNG is a less efficient file format, so more space is needed for the same amount of detail. Since The JGP one is working now, I suggest deleting the unneeded PNG, to save some space. --David B (TALK) 19:00, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Great suggestion. Deleted as recommended.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Thanks to both of you for your help! --1990'sguy (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Mr. Schlafly, it appears that you deleted the JGP, while DavidB4 requested that you delete the PNG. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:49, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Oops, you're right! Thanks for catching that. Will fix now.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:40, 12 March 2017 (EST)

Upload/use animation?

Hi, I have a question for you also. I've been working on the railgun article recently, and was looking for some good images to demonstrate it. However, I came across video clip which was provided by general atomics while they worked under military contract, to the U.S. Navy. The Navy then released it to the public. Since it was made on the government's dime, does it count as public domain? Here is the animation I'm considering uploading: [5].

In general, are animations of this sort okay? It seems CP does not permit video uploads, so I wanted to be sure before using this work-around. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 16:23, 10 March 2017 (EST)

Animations are fine to upload. Government works, such as the Navy video you describe, are in the public domain so they would be fine to copy and upload. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:21, 11 March 2017 (EST)
Okay, thank you! I've done it. --David B (TALK) 14:17, 11 March 2017 (EST)

Copyright/fair use question

Hi, User:Korvex has requested the upload of this movie poster. I know you recently OKed the upload of another movie poster, but I wasn't sure if it was a stretch to upload this one also. Of course, no license info is provided. It seems that this image is only available on a few minority websites, so it also makes me wonder if there is a legal reason no other big websites seem to have uploaded it. Do you think it's okay to upload it? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 19:11, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

That's an odd image. I wonder why it does not have credits on it, like most movie posters do. I'd prefer that permission be requested, and perhaps User:Korvex can do that.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2017 (EDT)
That was my inclination as well, but I wondered if I was being to cautious. I've responded to him/her, and we'll see how it goes. And by the way, I agree--it is odd. However, some graphic designer(s) put work into it, so it's only fair to give him/her/them credit. Thanks for the second opinion! --David B (TALK) 22:18, 13 March 2017 (EDT)

Old Testament books chart and Book of Amos

Hello, I'd like to draw your attention to this chart:

Template:Old Testament Books

It currently contains no link to Amos (Biblical book), but I created a substantial page on it just today. I was hoping that you would be able to add a link to Amos in this chart. A second thing to mention is that Obadiah is misspelled (the chart says 'Obediah'), so I was also hoping you could fix that typo.

Amos and Obadiah appear to be in the template. Am I missing something?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:16, 14 March 2017 (EDT)
They are in the template, but Obadiah (not "Obediah") is misspelled, and there is no link to Amos. There is an article Amos (Biblical book), but the template does not link to it. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:36, 14 March 2017 (EDT)
Thanks, I see now. I corrected the template and also unprotected it in case you'd like to make further improvements. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:45, 14 March 2017 (EDT)

Server errors

This site has had many internal service errors, many of which last for long periods of time. Lately, they have been very frequent and last for several minutes at the least. This is very annoying and disruptive for me, as many of my edits are disrupted when I press the save button, and I'm sure it is very disruptive for our readers. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:48, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

Traffic has been increasing and adjustments are being made to handle it. Thanks for your patience.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:58, 18 March 2017 (EDT)

Edit requests

Hello Mr. Schlafly, would you please replace Category:Authors for the articles Theo Hobson and Carl Sagan and add the categories Category:British Authors (for Hobson) and Category:American Authors (for Sagan), respectively? Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:01, 21 March 2017 (EDT)

In addition to the above, would there be any problem if I upload the cover for The Genesis Flood?[6] --1990'sguy (talk) 21:31, 21 March 2017 (EDT)
Did the requested edits, and uploading the book cover would be fine. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:37, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Special:Random

I recently noticed a minor technical problem in that whilst Conservapedia appears to have an essay namespace Special:Random/Essay usually goes to a mainspace article (occasionally going to an essay but this is also true of Special:Random with no namespace specified). As you are the owner of Conservapedia it was suggested I contact you about this problem. ChristopherW (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Don't have the answer to that immediately. Will think about it, and welcome suggestions by others.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:55, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
May I respectfully suggest that Special:Random not display essays. I am not clear what purpose would be served by the proposed link that would present essays at random. We should put our work into developing an accurate and up-to-date page with links to all essays. See Category:Essays, which is not complete. Thanks, JDano (talk) 16:24, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
Essay and Debate don't seem to be recognized by the Wiki as specific namespaces. I don't know if there is a way to register new namespaces or if you can only use the default MediaWiki namespaces. In any case agree with JDano, if that is possible. Someone wanting to get a feel for who we are might use the generic random link to look at a little of what we have. I think it would be better for them to see official wiki mainspace pages, not an essay which may or may not present CPs views. I don't know if that's possible, though. It all depends on the Wiki's configuration options, and is ultimately your decision, of course.
JDano, that's also a good idea to make sure all of our essays are in one category. Some of them have been done rather sloppily. I'll see if I can hunt down some of those orphaned, abandoned, and lonely essays :) --David B (TALK) 16:35, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
It looks like custom namespaces can be added. Current namespaces include Sysop, Team1, Team2, Am Govt 101

Supply Siders, and the associated talk namespaces as well. I'm not sure how those were added, but perhaps Essay and Debate could be added the same way? --David B (TALK) 12:47, 23 March 2017 (EDT)

I considered these thoughtful insights but I think "Essay" and "Debate" work well in the Main namespace, as a little variety. Some of our finest entries are essays, such as Essay:Best New Conservative Words. A defect to encyclopedias and Wikipedia that we overcome here is that we do encourage and allow some originality.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

I understand your point in terms of traffic, but ultimately we are trying to promote user choice and not surprise our readers with search results they are not expecting. The first step should be to put Category:Essay on every essay article. A second step might be to add some ranking extension on each essay page. For example, Wikipedia used to have an evaluation tool (which they stopped using) that allowed readers to rate articles with 1 to 5 stars. If we could apply the extension to each essay page, the readers could quickly decide if an essay was worth reading. Some essays such as Essay:Best New Conservative Words would get 5 stars, but there are also a few bad essays which could have been entitled, "The bad ramblings of someone who can't write well". JDano (talk) 21:05, 31 March 2017 (EDT)

Unlock template?

Hi, would you mind unlocking Template:Spam? It claims that we may report spam to SpamHaus, but SpamHaus does NOT accept ANY third-party reports. When used, it probably just makes us look foolish to spammers who probably know better. I would like to revise it, so our threats are at least plausible. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 13:26, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Unlocked as requested. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:39, 22 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you! I think I've finished, so if you get a chance, please review and protect it.
Also, I didn't want to distract from ChristopherW's question. I ended up almost dropping my question on top of his.
Thanks again! --David B (TALK) 14:56, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Edit request for Liberal hypocrisy

Andy, would you please add this info to the article Liberal hypocrisy in a new section entitled something along the lines of "Discrimination"? None of the other sections appear to be appropriate for this info:

===Homosexuality in the public schools=== [[File:Prairie Ridge High School LGBT+ Flag.jpg|thumb|200px|School in Chicago area (Prairie Ridge High School) with LGBT+ flag. Students in the same school who display the [[Confederate flag]] will face discipline.<ref name="NWHerald2017"/>]] Many public schools throughout the United States promote and indoctrinate students with the [[homosexual agenda]], oftentimes through publically-funded school programs created by [[GLSEN]].<ref name="Heyer2015">Heyer, Walt (June 8, 2015). [http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/06/15118/ Public School LGBT Programs Don't Just Trample Parental Rights. They Also Put Kids at Risk]. ''The Witherspoon Institute -- Public Discourse''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Much of this was the work of the [[Obama Administration]].<ref name="Heyer2015"/> GLSEN also promotes the homosexual agenda through a "day of silence."<ref>Berry, Susan (April 11, 2015). [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/04/11/day-of-silence-how-the-lgbt-agenda-is-hijacking-americas-youth/ Day of Silence: How the LGBT Agenda Is Hijacking America’s Youth]. ''Breitbart News''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> Although GLSEN "envisions a world in which every child learns to respect and accept all people, regardless of [[sexual orientation]] or [[gender identity]]/expression.",<ref>{{cite web |title=About GLSEN |url=http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/about/index.html}}</ref> GLSEN discriminates against persons with a Biblical worldview and will not tolerate the voice of [[ex-homosexuals|ex-gays]] or those helped by reparative therapy. If you disagree with the homosexual platform, GLSEN considers you to be a homophobe or bigot. GLSEN's view is flawed because they do not practice respect for all persons that they teach.<ref>{{cite web |title=Local CWA Leader Reaches Out to Youth at Homosexual Pressure Group Event |publisher=CWA |date=1/4/2008 |url=http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=14455&department=MEDIA&categoryid= |accessdate=March 9, 2014}}</ref> In some schools, where the rainbow flag (symbolizing homosexuality) is flown, students who promote the [[Confederate flag]] may expect to face disciplinary actions.<ref name="NWHerald2017">Prokop, Hannah (November 11, 2016). [http://www.nwherald.com/2016/11/09/prairie-ridge-high-school-suspends-student-for-wearing-confederate-flag-to-school/aelbmro/ Prairie Ridge High School suspends student for wearing Confederate flag to school]. ''Northwest Herald''. Retrieved March 24, 2017.</ref> ===IRS discrimination against conservative groups=== During the [[Obama Administration]], the [[Internal Revenue Service]] discriminated against conservative organizations by making them wait for years just to gain [[Nonprofit organization|tax-exempt status]]. At the same time, other groups received the same status in a very short period of time, such as a [[satanic]] group which received nonprofit status in only ten days.<ref>[http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/20/irs-granted-satanic-cult-tax-exempt-status-in-10-days-report-says.html IRS granted Satanic cult tax-exempt status in 10 days, report says]. ''Fox News''. Retrieved March 25, 2017.</ref><ref>Ernst, Douglas (March 20, 2017). [http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/mar/20/obama-irs-gave-satan-club-creator-fast-tax-exempt-/ Obama’s IRS gave ‘Satan Club’ creator fast tax-exempt status]. ''The Washington Times''. Retrieved March 25, 2017.</ref> --1990'sguy (talk) 22:49, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

Unprotected the entry so you can edit as you think best. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:33, 25 March 2017 (EDT)

Another template unlock request

Hi,
Would you mind unlocking Template:Essay? I'm trying to sort the essays alphabetically, but the template is forcing page sorting to include the "Essay" namespace, contrary to my efforts. I would like to remove that sorting from the template, so everything can sort properly.
Thank you! --David B (TALK) 16:38, 27 March 2017 (EDT)
EDIT: Actually, both commonly used essay templates try to do this. May I make the same change to Template:Essay By? If so, it needs to be unlocked as well. --David B (TALK) 16:48, 27 March 2017 (EDT)

Islam as official Religion in Bangladesh Anniversary

Seeing as tomorrow is March 28, a very solemn day for Bangladesh, would you consider adding it to the news/historical anniversaries section of the home page? On March 28 exactly one year ago the Supreme Court of Bangladesh upheld Islam as the official religion of Bangladesh, and considering the events in 2015 of the secularist bloggers who were brutally slain by Jamaat-e-Islami activists, the ruling was quite a setback. It signaled to the small minority of Atheists, Christians, Hindus, and Buddhists of Bangladesh that the government was not on their side despite the violence and oppression they endured.

http://www.thedailystar.net/city/islam-retains-status-state-religion-1200808

P.S. May I have permission to write a paragraph or two in the article Persecution of atheists on the atheists bruttaly slain by Jamaat-e-Islami and Al-Qaeda sympathizers? People like Ahmed Rajib Haider literally gave their lives to protest the Islamization of Bangladesh, they deserve to be mentioned by name. As well as the section titled "Low amount of atheist martyrdom compared to Christian martyrdom" just name a few of the atheists who made the ultimate sacrifice, like perhaps Ahmed Rajib Haider, Omar Mohammed Bataweel, Shafiul Islam, Avijit Roy, Ananta Bijoy Das, Oyasiqur Rhaman, Niloy Chatterjee, Faisal Arefin Dipan, Ahmedur Rashid Chowdhury, Narendra Dabholkar, Turan Dursun (agnostic), Kazimierz Łyszczyński, Lucilio Vanini. The article is locked.

Thank you for your consideration, IluvAviation (talk) 18:13, 27 March 2017 (EDT)

I'd like to learn more about this, and what level of evidence is there is for the claims. Can you post suggestions for the talk page for that entry? Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:38, 27 March 2017 (EDT)
The Jamaat-e-Islami group is suspected of war crimes during the war in Bangladesh in the 1970s; Ansarullah Bangla Team is the front for Al-Qaeda in Bangladesh. Bangladesh is more Islamic than some nations in the middle east. In over a period of a few months in 2015 over a dozen atheist bloggers were hacked to death with machetes in the streets of Dhaka, the capital. If you read my articles on Ahmed Rajib Haider (Atheist: died in machete attack) and Asif Mohiuddin (Ex-Muslim; barely survived knife attack, severely injured barely able to move his neck due to injuries though.) I provided numerous citations in the articles, plus a quick google search "Bangladesh bloggers" would help. Bangladesh used to have a secular-ish government, but now blasphemy laws are being enforced due to pressure from Islamists: Asif Mohiuddin spent three months in jail for insulting Muhammad. (Funny thing is, the constitution if Bangladesh if quite hypocritical: It says both Bangladesh is a secular nation, but Islam is the one and only official religion. Also blasphemy laws are coming back, I would not be surprised if apostasy is added to the penal code. OF course, given recent events publicly declaring oneself an apostate in Bangladesh would get you killed by Islamists) For the page, I would suggest a quick blurb, perhaps something like "One year ago, the Supreme Court of Bangladesh upheld Islam as the official religion of Bangladesh" To hear much about this stuff you have to read Bangladeshi newspapers and journals; Western news seem to write very little about the politics of it. For information about Jamaat-e-Islami war crimes:

http://www.economist.com/node/16485517?zid=309&ah=80dcf288b8561b012f603b9fd9577f0e

The Shahbag movement, which demanded Jamaat-e-Islami war criminals be punished: http://in.reuters.com/article/bangladesh-verdict-war-idINDEE9150CS20130206

About the hit-list of bloggers Bangladesh Islamists want dead (84 are still alive, not re-published for obvious reasons): https://www.dissidentblog.org/en/articles/84-bloggers-death-list

About Ansarullah Bangla Team (BTW, they use the same flag as ISIS): https://www.trackingterrorism.org/group/ansarullah-bangla-team-abt

About Jamaat-e-Islami party: https://www.trackingterrorism.org/group/jamaat-e-islami-bangladesh-jei IluvAviation (talk) 19:23, 27 March 2017 (EDT)

I created the Persecution of atheists article. Feel free to add relevant material to that article. Conservative (talk)
To recognize anything other than Allah as the supreme arbiter of law is blasphemy. The Bangledesh Supreme Court is basically transforming itself into something along the lines of a Sunni version of the Iranian Guardian Council. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 20:47, 27 March 2017 (EDT)

Delete request

As well as the unprotect requests above, would you also please delete John Mica, so Jon Mica can be moved there? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 11:47, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

Deleted and also unprotected the templates as requested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:49, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you, but it looks like the wrong page got deleted. Would you please restore Jon Mica And delete John Mica? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 15:27, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
Oops! Corrected as suggested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:39, 29 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you! You can restore protection of the templates now, if you wish. There are still some sorting issues, since probably about 100 essays are protected, so I cannot sort them. However, this is much better. --David B (TALK) 23:48, 29 March 2017 (EDT)

Done.Conservative (talk) 00:03, 30 March 2017 (EDT)

Umm, Thank you Conservative, but you just deleted John Mica, which I was trying to keep. It was Jon Mica which I ultimately wanted gone. Mr. Schlafly deleted the old page already, and I moved the Jon Mica content there. Would someone please restore John Mica again, unless there is another reason for it to be deleted? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 00:18, 30 March 2017 (EDT)
Done correctly. Conservative (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2017 (EDT)

Another delete request

Would you please also delete François Rabelais, so Francois Rabelais can be moved there? (note that it is a redirect, so please be careful not to delete the destination page.) Thank you! --David B (TALK) 10:48, 30 March 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you! I hate to keep pestering you with these, but would you also please delete SALT II so that SALT can be moved there? I'm trying to clean up some to the maintenance backlog we seem to have. Thanks again! --David B (TALK) 20:52, 30 March 2017 (EDT)
Thank you again! --David B (TALK) 00:09, 1 April 2017 (EDT)

Ready for primetime?

  1. 1 & #2 on Google (the page was split); #1 on Bing of 1,250,000 (growing about 100,000 a day); #2 on Yahoo. Obamagate timeline. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 00:04, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
Very nice--great work! --David B (TALK) 00:09, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
Fabulous!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:43, 1 April 2017 (EDT)
The table's turning on the Trump resistance crowd. I got 3 big stories that shoot holes in the underlying premise of Russian hacking and catch Obama cronies with their hands in the cookie jar. I can barely keep up with right now. The tide is turning from Trumpgate to Obamagate. And when mainstream journalists see they've been had, there'll be outrage and a stampede to jump <the Hillary/Obama ship. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 15:33, 1 April 2017 (EDT)

Conservative Jokes/Stories

Dear Mr. Schlafly,

I'd like to add some page to this site for conservative jokes, not as caustic as, say, our Atheism and mass murder/machismo/obesity/peanut butter essays, but more like the Conservative Parables page - it would double as entertainment and scholarly work, like Edith Hamilton's Mythology or the "Number Puzzles" article in Britannica. These would simple question/answer jokes about liberals (What's an abortion surgeon's least favorite song? "(You're) Having My Baby") or paragraphs, and nothing making them look excessively stupid, like old Hoosier jokes about Kentuckians. More like "How many atheists does it take to change a lightbulb? One, but he'll do it convinced that the intelligence-made power plant doesn't exist and the electricity comes from the Big Bang" or like this:

A homeschooled and high school aged, went to visit his more liberal older brother's college dorm room one day. He found the place to be as a typical dorm room - clothes scattered about the floor, textbooks and papers, and other things, but found his brother and his roommate eating frozen pizza. The roommate was struggling through an essay about Sons and Lovers while the brother struggled to cut the frozen pizza into slices. The conservative brother calmly assumes that they have no way to cook it besides the microwave.

Later, after they spend an afternoon together, the older brother goes back and offers his younger brother dinner. When the young accepts, the older hands him a Hot Pocket. The younger approaches the microwave and inserts his Hot Pocket.

"Hey, don't do that!" snaps the roommate. "Sorry - you make yours first," apologized the younger brother. "No one uses that microwave," explained the older brother. "Why?"

"Simple. All around the world, everyone microwaves their hot pockets, and that makes them hotter, and then the heat disperses. It causes global warming."

(That is an original work; I only used the <blockquote> tags to make it visible.)

Would something like this be worth adding to Conservapedia?

Nathan--Abcqwe (talk) 20:27, 3 April 2017 (EDT)

I really like your joke about abortionists. It would fine for you to start a Conservative jokes entry!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2017 (EDT)

A conservative Supreme Court Justice=

Andy, this is worth watching. Dick Morris says now that the filibuster is gone, Trump is free on to appoint a staunch conservastive needing only 50 votes next time. RobSCIA v Trump updated score:CIA 3, Trump 2 22:23, 6 April 2017 (EDT)

Trump was free to pick one this time, but he didn't pick a pro-life judge. No reason to think next time will be any better unless changes are made in the process. Also, a resignation by Kennedy is less likely with the filibuster removed.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:00, 6 April 2017 (EDT)

Question and request

Hello Andy, not to detract from RobS's post right above, but is it OK if I upload this image?

Secondly, would you please add Popular articles at Conservapedia to the main page? In four months it has received over 11,000 views. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:35, 6 April 2017 (EDT)

I need to consider further your first request above. It is a famous photo and perhaps there are some discussions online about it.
As to your second request above, the main page has a listing that is different, but similar to, the entry you suggest adding. Wouldn't that be duplicative?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:05, 6 April 2017 (EDT)
Oops! I apparently was not thinking when I did my copying-and-pasting! I meant Donald Trump achievements. It received over 11,000 views in four months (and I'm sure it will receive many, many more by the end of Trump's presidency), but it is not listed on the main page.
Also, if you would find out about the Truman "Dewey Wins" image, that would be great. It shows that fake news in the MSM has been around a long time. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:43, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
That photo is copyrighted. Also, it is not evidence of "fake news" because the publisher honestly thought that Dewey had won at the time that the paper went to press, when the headline probably should have been "Too close to call at press time." Sometimes false news stories get printed because of incomplete or incorrect sourced information, which is different from "fake news" that is made up to deceive the reader. JDano (talk) 09:23, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Once again, I think we have two different views of what fake news is. You say it is primarily on social media and intended to deceive. I don't deny that this comprises a portion of fake news, but I view it as also including news in the mainstream media that is untrue through bias. The Chicago Tribune supported Dewey for president. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:40, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Posted Donald Trump achievements on the main page as suggested. Great idea! The photo, however, is copyrighted so I think we need to hold off on posting that for now. It is intriguing to look at that famous photo as fake news.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Concerning Donald Trump achievements, thank you! Concerning the Harry Truman image, that is too bad. It's obviously not your fault, but I am very disappointed. It would have been a good image for the top of the fake news article. It would have given some fresh perspective on the issue. Now I'll have to find another image. :( --1990'sguy (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Maybe you'll find something even better!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:09, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Hopefully! --1990'sguy (talk) 22:12, 7 April 2017 (EDT)
Is there any way to find/upload the actual newspaper saying that Dewey won? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:45, 7 April 2017 (EDT)

Another delete request (relayed)

Hi, SamHB has requested that Spacetime be deleted, so that Curvature of spacetime can be moved there. If you agree, as I do, please delete Spacetime so this can be completed. (You can move if you wish, also, but I can do that.)
Thanks! --David B (TALK) 15:42, 7 April 2017 (EDT)

Archive Index

Andy, the archive index of this page User talk:Aschlafly/Archives does not look very neat. I cannot edit the page, but perhaps you want to copy & paste this code to supplant the current text? --AugustO (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

Done as suggested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:05, 8 April 2017 (EDT)

Found two more cases of Bible scientific foreknowledge and they both relate to the life of Jesus

I found two more cases of Bible scientific foreknowledge and they both relate to the life of Jesus. You can read about them HERE.

Maybe you could get this published in the AAPS journal by a Christian doctor. :) Conservative (talk) 07:59, 9 April 2017 (EDT)

Shroud article already expanded

It's Sudarium of Oviedo. And this happened some month ago! Karajou (talk) 21:32, 9 April 2017 (EDT)

Wow, that is a fantastic entry! Well done! I'll redirect the other entry to it.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:09, 9 April 2017 (EDT)

FYI about Conservative Bible Project

At Talk:Conservative Bible Project#The depth of Andrew Schlafly's ignorance I created a list of problems with your "knowledge" of Greek which you have displayed over time. I wont call you a charlatan, but I think that you are in way over your head. --AugustO (talk) 02:54, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Two more delete requests

When you get the chance, would you please delete [7] as User:1990'sguy requested, and [8] so that Fake News can be moved there, as I'm told User:JDano requested? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 03:06, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Deleted as requested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:23, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Thanks, but would you please also delete this redirect? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 11:11, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Deleted as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:36, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Suggestion to reduce conflict between AugustO and Andy Schlafly

I don't believe that there ever is going to be harmony between AugustO and Andy Schlafly as far as the Conservative Bible Project.

Rather than have perpetual conflict why not have AugustO launch a project called the Open Source Bible translation project. Each participant would have to sign off on a "statement of faith" to insure the participants have a high view of Scripture. Conservative (talk) 04:38, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

If there are fake news out there, it is not enough to post the real story somewhere else - you have to confront the fake news directly. In light of Rev 22:18-20, this is especially important for the a fake Good News. --AugustO (talk) 04:54, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Why not agree to launching a Open Source Bible translation project at Conservapedia and periodically criticize the CBP? You are never going to like the final product of the CBP. And you are never going to like co-laboring with Mr. Schlafly on the CBP. Conservative (talk) 05:14, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

see User_talk:AugustO#Why_don.27t_you_stop_working_on_the_CBP.3F. --AugustO (talk) 06:50, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

Example of where the CBP elevates American culture over Ancient Near Eastern culture and obscures original intent of biblical authors

The Conservative Bible Project indicates: "Prefer Conciseness over Liberal Wordiness: preferring conciseness to the liberal style of high word-to-substance ratio; avoid compound negatives and unnecessary ambiguities; prefer concise, consistent use of the word "Lord" rather than "Jehovah" or "Yahweh" or "Lord God."

The problem of this thinking is that it ignores than in Ancient Near Eastern cultures, names were very important and so was the meaning of names (see: THE CONCEPT OF SECRET NAMES IN THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST). For example, both Abraham and Peter were renamed in light of their calling.

Each name of God in the Old Testament has a specific meaning. And it is no accident that there are several names of God in the ancient Hebrew with various meanings. See: Names of God in the Old Testament

The Conservative Bible Project, however, sacrifices the specific meanings of God for the sake of efficiency (brevity) which is highly valued in American culture (efficiency experts, business orientation of America such as Calvin Coolidge saying the business of America is business, modern Americans short attention spans, etc. etc.).

I do understand that American conservatives value original intent when it comes to historical/legal documents. However, that is not what is happening with the Conservative Bible Project. Conservative (talk)

IRC

Hi,
Not to detract from the CBP war, but Conservative has suggested I create an IRC channel for Conservapedia, since the old one on freenode has not been used for over nine years (last used April 6th, 2008 at 17:52:59, to be exact), and has been closed automatically. Assuming you are in agreement, I set up a candidate channel on AccessIRC (#conservapedia @irc.AccessIRC.net) which can also be accessed by web client as well as standard IRC software. It seems to have some good services, which can help protect the channel from being stolen or lost, and allows for auto-op, so everyone selected will have SysOp privileges when they join and sign in.

If you are interested in moving ahead with this, and want to at least take a look, that would be great. I don't know how many people here use IRC, but the the web client might help though who usually don't to connect with those who do much more easily. I know this will give those who dislike us another attack vector, but there are some pretty good defenses we can use, up to and including an IRC bot which I can dust off and put to use, if needed.

I can even create directions on how to create accounts, and basic usage, if that would be helpful. Your input would be appreciated! --David B (TALK) 17:55, 10 April 2017 (EDT)

I am not familiar with IRC. It might be good. I'm willing to try it. But beware against opponents of this site using an alternative channel to scheme. My preference would be for communications to be transparent on the site itself. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:09, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
That is a good point. I know at least Conservative and I are familiar with IRC, so I was hoping enough moderators would be there that scheming would not be possible, but that isn't a given. It seems like scheming might just be done by E-mail otherwise, but I don't know. If you prefer not to try this, I don't want to push you, but as Conservative said, it may help promote a sense of community. Then again, no one may use it, and the whole thing might flop like last time. It's up to you--if you want to try it, I'll start parking the channel and update the IRC page, and perhaps you would want to put it on the home page, as Conservative suggested. If not, that's fine too. --David B (TALK) 18:38, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
If we want to strain out some potential opponents, we could actually probably make it so only people we select can talk in the channel. All trusted CP contributors could be given "voice" (the ability to post messages) and only they could talk, thus eliminating third-party individuals from conversation. That might a rather extreme solution, but could be considered, at least as a fall-back option if this doesn't start off well. --David B (TALK) 18:42, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Let's proceed and welcome all initially, and then proceed from there. Thanks and please let me know how I can help.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:15, 10 April 2017 (EDT)
Okay, sounds good! There are two things I know of which should probably be done. First, I should set up anyone who is interested and qualified with kick/ban permissions. To do this, they will need to join the IRC and follow some basic steps I can tell them. This privilege (and their account) will expire after 30 days of neglect, so this is only worthwhile if the people intend to use IRC somewhat regularly. Do I assume correctly that it is fair to grant ban permissions to anyone who has that right on CP itself? I can also set up the equivalent of "bureaucrats" so others such as yourself can grant these rights, if they wish.
Secondly, it might be a good idea to announce the IRC channel somehow, to let everyone know it exists. I don't know how would be best to do that.--David B (TALK) 13:22, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
I was also wondering if I should make a help page on how to use this IRC channel specifically. If so, what namespace shall I put it in? Thanks again! --David B (TALK) 13:37, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
Yes, a help page would be great, and it would also be good to grant ban permissions there to anyone who has blocking privileges here. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:42, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
Okay, I'm working on the page Conservapedia:Using IRC. Also, there is a user in the IRC named Andy which I'm guessing is you but unfortunately, I cannot verify. If you want me to set up admin for you, please set up an IRC account, as described here. If you have any issues, let me know! If you prefer not to go to that trouble, that's fine, but I won't be able to set you as a SysOp in the channel. I hope this helps! --David B (TALK) 20:44, 11 April 2017 (EDT)
It's me. I'll proceed with your link above for instructions.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

Okay, please let me know if you have any issues, and when you are done. Sorry for the extra effort, but it's how the system works. I tried setting it just now and I couldn't, so I assume you are still working on it, or waiting for the E-mail. --David B (TALK) 22:32, 11 April 2017 (EDT)

Sorry for the difficulty! This was supposed to be fairly easy, not just a waste of time!
Are the directions confusing/unclear, or do you think you understand what to do, but it isn't working? Conservative was having difficulty also, so it's not just you. --David B (TALK) 11:20, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
No problem. The instructions are clear and I will try again. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2017 (EDT)
Sorry I missed you in IRC again. Unfortunately, my profession tends to require unpredictable but immediate attention. I've been rather busy the last few days, so I haven't been able to give this as much attention as I should. In answer to your question, I'm working something from my end to (hopefully) resolve the issue and get you Admin rights. However, as you said, I don't know if it's worth it. We've had a fair number of people just dropping in, checking who is on, and immediately leaving. Since they don't stay, others don't stay, etc. If enough people want this, it can work. If not, we'll probably keep seeing what we do now, except with a slow decline in pop-ins. I'm willing to keep trying it, but if you want to call it quits at any time, that's fine. In the mean time, I'll keep working on getting you a privilege assignment. --David B (TALK) 19:33, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
Okay, I think I hove it set up correctly now. I've sent you any e-mail, containing instructions on how to log in. If you get a chance, please give it a try and let me know how it works. Again, sorry for all the difficulty! --David B (TALK) 20:42, 13 April 2017 (EDT)
I think it worked! By the way, I was not disparaging the IRC chat channel, which I think is worthwhile, but was merely questioning whether I needed Admin privileges there. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2017 (EDT)

An edit request

Andy, would you please edit the Homosexuality article to add the sentence: "It is a form of gender confusion." This sentence would be the second sentence of the article in the top paragraph. It is unfortunate that our culture is losing the meaning of male vs. female, and I think we should make Gen. 1:27 clear. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:31, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

That's an interesting -- but debatable -- suggestion. Thank you. I'd like to hear User:Conservative's thoughts about it.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2017 (EDT)

Star Wars may be a great film, but it most certainly is not conservative.

I saw your addition to the news bulletin about whether Star Wars should be listed as being among the greatest conservative films. My answer is quite frankly, no, it shouldn't, even if it is exceedingly popular. Don't forget, George Lucas formed the film franchise as disguised anti-Vietnam War propaganda that was meant to make us Americans the bad guys and the Vietcong the good guys, and the Prequel Trilogy makes the left-wing elements of the franchise FAR too apparent when they not only revealed the Republic had no military, but them even FORMING a military was treated in a bad light when Padme advocated against creating the military. Heck, even in Return of the Jedi, it pushed post-modernism or at least moral relativism when Obi-Wan told Luke that what he said about Vader killing Anakin was "true, from a certain point of view" and that many things depend on our point of view, which goes completely against the grain of absolute truth. And just because it sells well doesn't make it a great conservative film or anything. The Metal Gear series was a big-selling franchise, that pushed so many left-wing elements that, with the possible exception of Snake Eater and Portable Ops (and the latter wasn't even made by Hideo Kojima), none of the games can really qualify as conservative by any stretch. Pokeria1 (talk) 13:09, 15 April 2017 (EDT)

What about the overriding themes of Good and Evil, and the concept of "let the Force be with you"?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:23, 15 April 2017 (EDT)
The problem is, almost everyone thinks they are on the "good" side, even when they aren't. As far a "the force" goes, it is described as a power which is neither good nor evil--with enough focus and use of trances, it can be harnessed for your purposes, whether good or bad. That sounds more like a pagan god who has no moral compass, but simply "helps" those who serve him to convince them he (Satin really) is real. Or, it could be compared to demon possession. "Clearing your mind or all thoughts" and meditating, then as a result, seeing visions and having superhuman abilities sounds a lot like what Satin and his minions want people to do for them. Of course, it never ends well, be he doesn't show that the the people he is pulling in. --David B (TALK) 13:49, 15 April 2017 (EDT)
What DavidB4 said (though I'm not necessarily sure I agree with him regarding whether everyone or even nearly everyone thinks they are on the "good" side. I know the Marquis de Sade most certainly didn't think he was at all good if the quote "Imperious, choleric, irascible, extreme in everything, with a dissolute imagination the like of which has never been seen, atheistic to the point of fanaticism, there you have me in a nutshell, and kill me again or take me as I am, for I shall not change." is anything to go by). Besides, Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker depicted Che Guevara as a good guy, and the CIA as evil. Technically, even Liberal stories can use the concepts and themes of "Good" and "Evil" to frame their agenda, so it's not good enough to state whether something's truly conservative. In fact, to use another example, the entire premise of the TV series Supergirl is about Good vs. Evil, taking down the bad guy of the week before he or she causes more harm, yet the current season was practically pushing the hard-left agenda, like Alex Danvers becoming a lesbian, the repeated anti-Trump narrative, making a female president character in a clear attempt at promoting Hillary Clinton as president (even having her gender being mentioned in the very first episode of the season), among others. Pokeria1 (talk) 13:58, 15 April 2017 (EDT)
EDIT: I just remembered something else: Obi-Wan made a statement that was inherently anti-Conservative, both in Revenge of the Sith and even as early as Return of the Jedi. He said, and I quote, "The truths we cling to depend greatly on our point of view.", in response to Luke's reaction when Obi-Wan told Luke that his lie about Vader killing Anakin was "true, from a certain point of view." Last I checked, most of us conservatives do not adhere to that line of thinking, I certainly don't, and I doubt God does (I doubt he'd repeatedly say "You're either with me or against me" or say "I am the truth! I am the way!" if he believed what Obi-Wan claimed). Far from promoting a clear concept of good and evil, they arguably muddled it beyond labels. Pokeria1 (talk) 16:57, 17 April 2017 (EDT)
He also said in Revenge of the Sith that "only a Sith deals in absolutes." This comment blatantly supports relativism and opposes biblical Christianity, as we Christians believe the Bible and Christianity to be absolutely true. Star Wars was created and mainly directed by George Lucas, and his politically and socially left-wing views can be clearly seen in the films. The fact that Hollywood, in general, abhors conservatives, as well as Donald Trump, doesn't help. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:23, 17 April 2017 (EDT)
Those are excellent points, but it seems to me the overriding theme is one of Good versus Evil, the existence of an unseen force for good, and faith. At least those seemed to be themes in the original. Sounds pretty conservative to me.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:40, 17 April 2017 (EDT)
Faith? Even Solid Snake in Metal Gear Solid 2 talked about having faith during the game's ending, and if I recall correctly, it was the same scene where Snake explicitly denied that there was ever such a thing as "absolute reality" and even implied that reality itself was just fiction, and most certainly pushed liberal values overall (namely, it tried to push that American culture ITSELF was pure, ultimate, irredeemable evil, and that memes are the only things that actually mattered). And don't forget that the game had an unseen force where Fortune actually managed to deflect several missiles from RAY... DESPITE her electromagnetic gizmo being turned off at the time, and by that time, she DIED a good guy. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

What I found in Star Wars was this: it is a tale - a classic tale, mind you - of good versus evil; the "good" being a rebellion against an overbearing, overreaching, over-controlling, and extremely-hostile tyrannical government, and it is the word "tyrannical" which cannot be avoided here. The hypocrisy comes from many of the actors who took part in this film, who repeatedly demonstrated that they have no compunction whatsoever about supporting an overbearing, overreaching, over-controlling, and extremely-hostile federal government, especially one that is leftist/socialist. Karajou (talk) 19:01, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

In case you've forgotten, Karajou, said "good rebellion" had explicitly been derived from the Vietcong (George Lucas and Walter Murch MORE than made that clear, and is probably one of the few statements Lucas said that not only were consistent in every time he said them, but was actually backed up by development notes, dating back to 1973. He even said "We are at a turning point: fascism or revolution" in the story treatment in 1973, and based on some of his comments and actions, I'm doubtful he had in mind the American War of Independence when he said "revolution" so much as the French or Russian revolutions.), which was anything BUT good, slaughtering countless innocents even AFTER the war (not to mention conducting extremely, needlessly brutal actions during the war, even including directly harming children just to cow their parents into not voting that day), and even went as far as to slaughter their own numbers just for fun. Besides, many in our education system and media claimed that Che Guevara, Mao Zedong and the French Revolutionaries were the same, that they were fighting against a tyrannical government, despite the fact that they more often than not were far WORSE than the "tyrants" they replaced. That's not good enough to actually push conservative values, especially if said "good rebellion" also tries to create a worse thing than the group they deposed. Heck, regarding the Republic that they were fighting to restore, Lucas even implied during Cannes that he partially modeled the Republic after the First French Republic from the French Revolution and its fall to when Napoleon took power, which if anything made the Republic look even WORSE than how the films presented it. Saw Gerrera was even explicitly based on Che Guevara, if the art of Rogue One is to be believed. Pokeria1 (talk) 19:22, 17 April 2017 (EDT)

What are good and evil, other than "our side" vs. "the others"? Surely the great civilization of Western Christendom has a definition that we can all agree on. My favorite formulation is: "Goodness benefits others as much as oneself; however, evil sacrifices others for one's own benefit."

On that basis, I would say that the first Star Wars (1977) exemplified these values. Whether other films in the series degenerated, or departed from expressing this ideal, is a viable possibility. George Lucas may have been responding unconsciously to an inspiration from heaven at first. Who knows how long that inspiration lasted? --Ed Poor Talk 07:47, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

Unfortunately, when the Rebels are explicitly based on the Vietcong and the Empire was based on America in the 1973 story treatment onward, and Lucas deliberately doing that to flip the bird towards our involvement in Vietnam a'la Apocalypse Now (which he had formerly been involved in, BTW), it's pretty clear that his idea of good and evil is indeed an "us vs. them", and considering he wore a Mao military outfit at one point during filming AND he actually quoted Marx when describing his ideal film-making studio, it's obvious he knew what the Vietcong were truly like, and how they were mass-murdering psychopaths yet supported them, when most people would think of that as evil if they know it. You know, I may need to post the actual notes for the first film just to prove it in the future. That's also why I'm an Empire supporter now, despite making it a policy to NEVER root for the villain under any circumstance (unless the heroes are communists and the villains are Christians or something similar). It also doesn't help that in the novelization for A New Hope, it was made VERY clear that Leia had lied about Alderaan's lack of weapons (as if there was any doubt considering the Tantive IV and her guards obviously had weapons and they were from Alderaan), and that Obi-Wan explicitly stole a few Stormtrooper's free will via the Jedi Mind Trick with that being treated as a good thing (even though I'm personally not a very big fan of free will since I see it as little different than anarchy and chaos). Pokeria1 (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2017 (EDT)

Adding in a link regarding where George Lucas made these statements, specifically photos taken by me from the Making of Star Wars, one of the pages featuring a direct scan of Luca's own yellow pad transcriptions. You can find them here (and yes, I was the one who took pictures of them via cellphone, and that is in fact my tumblr account.).

https://otnesse.tumblr.com/post/162081709399/this-is-from-george-lucas-1973-notes-for-star

This should settle the matter regarding whether Star Wars is truly conservative or not. Pokeria1 (talk) 07:35, 21 June 2017 (EDT)

Renaming Articles

Hello. There are at least twenty important articles on Conservapedia that need their titles renamed:

Every single one of these biblical books need their names changed from "____ (Biblical book)" to "Book of ____". The reason for this is because 1. It is less awkward of a title, and more importantly, 2. When referring to the page from another article, saying "It is said in the Book of Exodus" is a lot more well-structured of a statement then "It is said in Exodus (Biblical book)" repeated over and over throughout Conservapedia. I hope you will be able to do this, or at least assign this task to someone who is able to do this. So, for example, "Jeremiah (Biblical book)" will be changed to "Book of Jeremiah", along with the rest. Hopefully this will not take up much of your valuable time.

Great suggestion. I've moved the first five, and will move the others promptly also. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:46, 21 April 2017 (EDT)
I think I've moved all the rest, except for Ruth (Biblical book) which cannot be moved until Book of Ruth is deleted. --David B (TALK) 21:07, 21 April 2017 (EDT)
Moved to the Book of Ruth. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:16, 21 April 2017 (EDT)
Thanks a lot. One more thing though, now that all those books have been taken care of. See this:
I recently created all the pages on the New Testament books that still did not exist, and so now the chart has full links to all New Testament books and will not need any further editing (the Old Testament books may call for such a thing, though). Therefore, this chart should be locked from further editing. God Bless.
Thanks much. I don't think it is necessary to lock the chart unless vandalism becomes a problem for it. Well done!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:43, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Let's avoid infinite blocking

I have noticed that some of the blockers do infinite blocks. This can cause problems down the block potentially.

The average person moves about every 7 years I heard. And most vandals are younger than the average person's age so they probably move more frequently (college students, etc.). Plus, a lot of vandals are loser/drifters probably so they may move even more frequently.

I block for about 5 years. I don't see why people have to block longer.

Any input from blockers would be welcome. Conservative (talk) 18:46, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Great point. I agree, and reduced the duration.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:58, 22 April 2017 (EDT)
I agree, but for a somewhat different set of reasons.
  1. Unless the user pays for premium hosting, ISPs seem to like mixing around IPs periodically, probably so running servers on personal network service is made difficult. When we set an infinite block on someone, the IP is likely to be rotated to some other person at some point, perhaps in a month, perhaps in three years, or perhaps almost any other amount of time later. This means that especially with IPv4 address shortage, there is a good chance that the blocked IP will be rotated to another innocent user. Just like that, some innocent person has been blocked for no good reason.
  2. Many attackers use, well, "web servers allowing spam" (you know the name) to carry out their attacks. Since these servers try to maintain anonymity, most change change IP addresses frequently. The end result is the same--the block on that server is rotated to some innocent person who happened to get that banned IP assigned to them.
Physically moving, changing of beliefs, and many other reasons should, in my opinion, warrant an expiration date on blocks as well. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 20:01, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Is there a way to unblock everyone who has been blocked for more than, say seven years, or to turn all indefinite blocks into five-year blocks? Indefinite blocks may make us feel good, but I think they will hurt our viewership in the long run. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:36, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Also agree, and besides, speaking as someone who had to fairly recently endure an infinite block on one of the wikis, it comes at the risk of the mods coming across as people who view themselves as above the law and blocking anyone for even giving criticism for some decisions being made by them (namely, citing how a Complete Monster trope is downright broken and especially protesting the removal of one character due to their actions not being "heinous enough" to qualify despite a lot of those character's actions truly qualifying as heinous.). Had a huge amount of distrust of mods to be honest, due to actually encountering several mods and admins on forums who banned me for "flaming" despite the fact that I was reacting to them flaming, and their not being banned simply because they were a mod (in fact, I distrust them to such an extent that I outright refuse to accept modship or adminship precisely BECAUSE I fear turning out like them), and, not to imply any of you are like that, but the less mods like that and the less opportunities for mods to act like that, the better. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:44, 22 April 2017 (EDT)

Another unlock request

Hi, would you please unlock Template:Age so I can add some simple documentation? It's a very simple template, but does not explain usage.
Thanks! --David B (TALK) 17:27, 27 April 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:37, 27 April 2017 (EDT)
And thank you! I've briefly explained usage, as planned. It's nothing fancy, but hopefully will help. I think I'm done, so you may lock it again, if you wish. --David B (TALK) 22:53, 27 April 2017 (EDT)
Relocked it, thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

Hello, can you please unlock Template:Nb_sl_english_premier so I can update it? Thanks!--Gentenaar (talk) 11:37, 15 May 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:22, 15 May 2017 (EDT)
Updated, now we just have to wait for the winner of the play offs, but until then this template can be relocked again.--Gentenaar (talk) 14:17, 15 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks, I'll leave it unlocked for you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:20, 15 May 2017 (EDT)
The template is complete again. --Gentenaar (talk) 14:19, 29 May 2017 (EDT)

MPR request

In a few hours, President Trump's 100th day in office will begin. Would you please add an MPR item about Trump's 100 days, with the article Donald Trump achievements linked to it? The MSM had made it seem like Trump has done nothing in office, but they forget or just don't care about his rollback or regulations (record use of Congressional Review) and other actions. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:19, 28 April 2017 (EDT)

Edit request

Would you please add Mike Pence to Template:USVicePresidents? Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:24, 29 April 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2017 (EDT)

Dear Andrew Schlafy, not sure if this is the best way to contact you! I'm interested to know the progress of your Conservative Bible Project. I'd also like to know how to contribute to the conservative news feed on the landing page. Where are you sourcing news which MSM under-reports from? Thanks. (Email would have been easier.)

Two move requests

Hello Andy,

An editor with good intentions saw the article A380 and decided to move it to Airbus A380. However, she did it manually, meaning the edit history is on the old name, which is now a redirect.

Would you please delete the article (NOT the current redirect). Then, you please revert the editor's removal of information on the redirect page ("A380") and then move the article to "Airbus A380"? This editor's change was completely of good intentions, for reassurance.

Also, there is a similar request at the bottom of User talk:Jpatt. Jpatt has not responded to the request yet. Would you please fix that error as well? --1990'sguy (talk) 19:05, 30 April 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested. Please let me know if I missed anything. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:32, 30 April 2017 (EDT)
I think you've fixed everything. However, you just accidently removed a bracket from the code for "Obama's Religion" on MPL. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:37, 30 April 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for catching that! Fixed it now.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:05, 30 April 2017 (EDT)

Notable article?

This article, The American Minarchist, appears to of an unnotable blog that does not even have its own domain name. Do you agree that it should be deleted? --1990'sguy (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2017 (EDT)

Deleted as suggested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:43, 1 May 2017 (EDT)

question re Conservative Bible

Hi Andrew, I'm developing a bible website and bible app, would we be able to use the conservative bible as a version to offer the public?

As long as your project is a good faith effort to communicate the Bible, the answer is yes. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:06, 3 May 2017 (EDT)

The main aim is to get people all over the world reading and interacting with the Bible; one of the versions should be a Bible stripped of liberal/ marxist bias. How do we download your Bible in its entirety? Blessings!

Is anyone watching this thread? Request for Conservative Bible posted 4 days ago with no reply from anyone.

If I am not mistaken, you can copy-and-paste CP's translation directly from the site. The main page of the CBP, where you can find all the links to the translations of the books of the Bible, is here: Conservative Bible Project. I hope this helps! --1990'sguy (talk) 23:00, 6 May 2017 (EDT)

Thank you for trying to help. I have been to the page and only see links to each individual book in excel format. Where can I download the entire Conservative Bible in one shot? It shouldn't be this hard if we are trying to get a masculine, conservative Bible out to the public. User:endtime

There was an editor who compiled it all in one place a few years ago. I'll try to find that. Maybe others recall and recollect where that was.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:59, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

Please can you email me when you find it: editor@newswars.com.au Shalom. Just coming back to check this page, no reply. No one in Conservapedia knows where the Conservative Bible is stored as one file?

I'm working on your request in order to find it. Thanks for your patience.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:27, 1 June 2017 (EDT)

Anther move request

Hello Andy, another mistaken editor manually moved an article, destroying the edit summary, and this has to be undone.

The article "Hamilton" was originally about a city in Canada, but a user ("Koidevelopment"; who BTW is an RW admin but appears to be editing here in good faith) manually moved the contents to "Hamilton (city)."

Please revert all of Koidevelopment's edits on Hamilton (he made three). Then please delete the newly-created Hamilton (city) article. Then, please move Hamilton to "Hamilton (city)". Then please add the disambiguation content on "Hamilton" back to what became a redirect. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:43, 7 May 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:20, 7 May 2017 (EDT)

A new prospect for Conservapedia?

Korvex (talk) 21:01, 8 May 2017 (EDT)

I think there may be a way to improve Conservapedia as it is. One way to get permanent new readers and new editors is for Conservapedia to be an aesthetically pleasing (as in a good-looking) site. One thing I noticed when comparing Wikipedia and Conservapedia, is that on the main page of Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page), there is a nice box at the top that says 'Welcome to Wikipedia', and then Wikipedia lists 9 important subjects on the right-hand side of this box (arts, biography, geography, mathematics, etc). Under the box, that acts as a nice banner and intro for the site, is the featured articles, news, etc. However, Conservapedia (http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page) does not have any box at the top featuring the website or introducing it, but it immediately gets into the featured articles and news, in a kind of text-jammed way. This may not be easy on the eyes for new viewers, and is not as aesthetically pleasing as Wikipedia. I think adding an introductory box at the top of Conservapedia would be important and beneficial for the site. It will give new visitors to the site a way to to basically see what our site is and is about on the top, like Wikipedia. I think that one reason why Wikipedia is the dominant encyclopedia on the internet is because it can jam a lot of text into a screen and make it look good as well. I think adding an introductory box at the top of Conservapedia, that says something like 'Welcome to Conservapedia', and perhaps under it short motto like 'a beneficial encyclopedia' (or something) would be a good improvement for the website. For example, something like this:

Welcome to Conservapedia,
a beneficial encyclopedia that anyone can participate in.
44,875 articles in English


I'm not inherently opposed to it, but the tag would have to be improved. I think the words should either be centered, or the template should look more "full." --1990'sguy (talk) 22:39, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
These are good ideas worth considering. However, the number of entries is a meaningless statistic. Wikipedia fills its site with trivia, making it less useful.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:45, 8 May 2017 (EDT)
Putting aside the trivia of Wikipedia, I do note that I want to improve the aesthetics of Conservapedia. I found that en.wikipedia.org is more aesthetically pleasing than conservapedia.com, and the banner on the top was a big difference that I find will improve Conservapedia. This will be helpful for attracting new users and new editors, and I find it very important for new visitors to the website that Conservapedia introduces itself to them before throwing hundreds of words of text at them, which is not easy on the eyes (first impressions are a big deal when checking new websites). It's interesting to note -- the more visited pages on Conservapedia many times are pretty nice-looking pages. Before implementing any such thing though, we should discuss any additions/deletions we might want to make to the banner.Korvex (talk) 00:25, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
Note: I put some more features on the banner (9 simple pages on the right-hand side of the page). Do you guys think this is an improvement?Korvex (talk) 19:32, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
I would also like to let you know, Andy, that the "Endtime" user who wants a copy of the CBP still has some questions for you. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:44, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
Korvex makes an important point. Nice looking pages do significantly better as far as page view. If a page was created on Conservapedia: Uploading pictures that gave instructions on what kind of pictures/images can be uploaded to Conservapedia and perhaps some person assigned oversight of the people uploading pictures/images, then more Conservapedia pages would look attractive.Conservative (talk) 20:35, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
Questions: 1) How many active Conservapedia editors have picture uploading privileges? 2) How many people with picture uploading privileges would be ideal? 3) What do you think is the best way to get to the ideal number of people being able to upload pictures if we are not there at this time? 4) How important is it that we delete pictures which are currently not being used if they are unusable or find a way to put them to use if they are useable?Conservative (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2017 (EDT)
If you think en.wikipedia.org looks good, wait till you see en.m.wikipedia.org. It's in its beta stage, and it looks so good. Vive Liberté! 21:16, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

Wikipedia's fundraising/expenses ratio could certainly cause them significant problems.[9]

I also came across some information which leads me to believe that they could start to significantly bleed editors in the next 2-3 years. And once again, Wikipedia is seeing a decline in their number of editors. Furthermore, generation Z is far more conservative than millennials which does not bode well for Wikipedia (see: The Next Generation of Americans (Gen Z) May Be the Most Conservative Since WWII). Conservative (talk) 21:49, 9 May 2017 (EDT)

Conservative, I think we need to stay focused on the important issue: Conservapedia's aesthetics. Adding a website introductory-banner like Wikipedia has done will be a significant improvement in my opinion, for reasons already noted. Wikipedia has serious editor issues, but there's no doubt that the reason why it got to such a high level in the first place is because the website looks really good. Conservapedia should strive to do the same on this issue, without adopting the bias in some articles. I'm all for integrating the introduction banner. We can also discuss improvements that can be made to the current 'test' version I've put out so far.Korvex (talk) 13:28, 10 May 2017 (EDT)

So. What do you guys think about adding the banner in, after this discussion? I'm all for it. Any more takers? I think that -- if we do think it should be added in -- we should have a discussion (perhaps on a new thread or page) on what should be on the banner before executing it.Korvex (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2017 (EDT)

Technical issue(s)

Sir, when I submit an edit and get the question to answer, sometimes I put in the correct answer and it is rejected, but accepted at other times, and also when inserting the answer I've received an "Internal 500 Server Error." I've received an explanation for the latter, but if you could assist with the former that would be excellent. Thanks in advance. --Anglican (talk) 19:18, 10 May 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for mentioning this. I just promoted your account to SkipCaptcha so you will bypass the questions. Godspeed.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:43, 11 May 2017 (EDT)
I thank you for this, but there also does appear to be someone wrecking several pages.--Anglican (talk) 17:36, 13 May 2017 (EDT)
I've blocked him--thanks for your vigilance! Also, congratulations on the promotion! --David B (TALK) 17:44, 13 May 2017 (EDT)
User:Bobcon also needs to be blocked for a vandalistic insertion into the Donald Trump article.--Anglican (talk) 16:37, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
Blocked him. Thanks for mentioning it.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2017 (EDT)
Also mentioning that the vandalistic insertion Taylor Swift hates the Lord still needs deletion. Thank you much. --Anglican (talk) 09:59, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
Deleted as suggested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:14, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
Excellent. I also suggest that Template:Elvis Presley be protected since the same vandal vandalized it and as a template, the vandalism affects multiple pages at once. --Anglican (talk) 17:34, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

That same page has been recreated and should be deleted and protected from recreation. --Anglican (talk) 08:28, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Are you recommending deletion of the Elvis entry rather than protecting it? It seems like a valid entry to me. A good encyclopedia contains cultural items.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 09:24, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
No, sir. My mistake. I meant that "Taylor Swift hates the Lord" has been recreated and should be deleted and the title protected from recreation. --Anglican (talk) 10:06, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
Template:Bible Cities should also be protected. --Anglican (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2017 (EDT)

Your students

Out of curiosity, how many of your students are still active here? Is there any place I could talk with them or one of them? Vive Liberté! 10:20, 12 May 2017 (EDT)

No, there is not. This is an online encyclopedia.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:53, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
I was just wondering, given the fact that there are debate pages. Thanks though. Vive Liberté! 11:21, 12 May 2017 (EDT)

Move error

RobS decided to move the article on the 2012 election, but he accidentally made a typo, so the new title is United States Presidential Election, 2016. Would you please fix the obvious error. Also, I don't like the fact that Rob capitalized the "P" and "E" in the title. All words that are not proper nouns should be lower case, including non-category titles. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:33, 12 May 2017 (EDT)

In addition to the above, this time regarding the actual 2016 presidential election, would you please delete the redirect United States presidential election, 2016 and move the 2016 U.S. presidential election there? --1990'sguy (talk) 17:42, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
Andy, I see your title change. I have no inherent problem with it, but I have two concerns:
First, I do not think the "E" in your preferred title should be capitalized. When we do CP searches, the are case-sensitive, and most people probably would not capitalize the "E".
Secondly, every U.S. presidential election prior to 2012 has the title of "United States presidential election, XXXX". The 2012 and 2016 election articles may have a better title, but there are 56-or-so other presidential elections with the title you do not prefer. We need consistent titles for all our presidential election articles. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:27, 12 May 2017 (EDT)
You make good points, and I pondered them. The "e" in election usually is capitalized, so I think people are more likely to search on "Presidential Election" than "Presidential election." But generally I do prefer lower-case to upper-case. As to the format of older elections prior to 2012, I think they can be in the more formal historical style. But contemporaneous elections can be titled better with a more concise, straightforward headline. Consistency is not preferable to ease-of-use.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:17, 13 May 2017 (EDT)
Lower case helps for ease of use for internal links. Also, when I search, i rarely use caps at all. "Election" is not a proper noun. RobSTrump now is fighting back against the coup plotters 01:02, 13 May 2017 (EDT)

We don't worship government

President Donald Trump In America we don’t worship government, we worship God Trump to Liberty University Grads: 'We Don't Worship Government, We Worship God'

About time someone said it!Progressingamerica (talk) 22:34, 15 May 2017 (EDT)

Amen.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:29, 16 May 2017 (EDT)

Monsieur..

What is your opinion on a self-driving car? Métrosexuel (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2017 (EDT)

I have an open mind about self-driving cars, but am skeptical about their real usefulness. I think right now they are probably ore dangerous then companies admit.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:04, 18 May 2017 (EDT)

Manchester attack

Would you please mention it on MPR? It's killed about 22 and injured about 59, and ISIS has claimed responsibility. I'm disappointed that nobody's added it already. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:05, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

I politely asked user Conservative to post this story on MPR, suggesting that the murder of children, one aged 8[10] was more important than a blog post titled "Atheists are boring snoozefests". He disagreed and I was blocked for suggesting such. Here is a picture[11]--FTorres (talk) 11:11, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
MPR expressly states that it is for "what the MSM isn't fully covering." Obviously the mainstream media is covering the Manchester murders, with wall-to-wall publicity. We're here to provide insights not covered by the lamestream media. Of course, our prayers are with the victims, and our advocacy is against government policies that result in such horrors.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:32, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
True, but months ago you mentioned that Donald Trump won the election, just because it was big news. The mainstream media wasn't hiding that even though they wanted to do so.--Nathan (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Right, but that was an issue we had focused on here for months beforehand. It also occurred in the United States, unlike the Manchester massacre. Finally, liberal denial did persist about the Trump election.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:31, 23 May 2017 (EDT)
Makes sense. Okay.--Nathan (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

I wasn't following the news closely at the time and was not aware of the Manchester attack. I also didn't pay close attention to what the troll said given some of his posts. Conservative (talk) 18:39, 23 May 2017 (EDT)

Addition to liberal denial article

Would you please add this to the Liberal denial article, as it is locked? --1990'sguy (talk) 13:55, 24 May 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 09:21, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Protected redirect move request

Hello Andy, would you please move this double redirect that is protected? Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:58, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for mentioning this. "Sanctuary city" is the preferred title, with the other entries as redirects, don't you think? Entry titles should be what people are most likely to type in.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:07, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
I agree, but this is a double redirect, so it leads a reader to another redirect rather than the actual article. I cannot move it because it is protected. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:11, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
So, would you please move the double redirect? You may have misunderstood, this has ZERO to do with the title of the actual article. Double redirects are annoying. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:04, 25 May 2017 (EDT)
I think I fixed it. Please let me know if there are still any issues with it. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:06, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Conservapedia endoresements for New Jersey Republican gubernatorial primary

Hi Andy,

Does Conservapedia have any endorsements for the New Jersey Republican gubernatorial primary on June 6? Thanks, GregG (talk) 23:10, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Great question, Greg! I need to look into that, and soon!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:25, 25 May 2017 (EDT)

Koch Bros.

Andy, hate to point out the obvious, but you sound like Rachel Maddow with your anti-Koch Bros. jihad. A simple fact is: the GOP dominance in 42 states, with it's trickle down effect of gerrymandering US House districts, is all the Koch Bros. work. The GOP wouldn't be enjoying the success it has today if not for the Koch Bros. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:37, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

Looks like we'll disagree on this one. The Koch brothers were virulently anti-Trump through the July convention, and to this day. Trump carried the GOP to record success, despite the Koch brothers. Their agenda is self-serving and often opposed to conservative principles.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:43, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
Thus far, over the past several decades, the Koch Bros. have risked more of their own money and have far more tangible success to show for it than Trump could ever dream of. And in eight years Koch money will still be building and supporting a Republican coalition, while Trump's focused on building a library. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:48, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
Predictions are not falsifiable in the present, so no rebuttal is possible to your assertion. But of the upwards of a billion dollars spent mostly in secret by the Koch brothers, can anyone point to anything good achieved? 12 states have passed a Convention of States (Con Con) to rewrite the U.S. Constitution for their globalist goals. That's not much to write home about.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:10, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
First off, please see the latest discussion I started on the talk page of the Obama's Religion article. Second, I do not know which 12 states have passed the Convention of States, but I'm assuming they are Republican-controlled. You may not like what they're doing -- and that's fair -- but it is not fair to say they are doing it do advance globalism. I don't think Greg Abbott or Mark Levin want to use this to bring globalism (and the GOP state governments have generally been much more conservative than the feds (voter ID laws, pro-life, pro-gun, right-to-work, etc.). For those people, they may be very misguided and wrong, but they are not doing this to advance left-wing ideology. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:35, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
There are many Republican politicians who are globalists. It's a bipartisan ideology. Abbott sold out to the Koch brothers. That connection has been widely reported. Mark Levin made money selling a book about this. He's not a principled conservative. Levin opposed Trump. Why? In part because Levin is a bit of a globalist.
I'll check your comments on Obama's Religion.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:21, 28 May 2017 (EDT)

How to get a better Alexa ranking

We can help Alexa keep track of our traffic by installing some software: "Top 5 Benefits of Alexa Certified Metrics." PeterKa (talk) 20:50, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

A good idea, but to do that we would need to pay a fee. --David B (TALK) 21:09, 27 May 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for the suggestion, but I think our time and effort are better spent in a different way.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:11, 27 May 2017 (EDT)

Delete request

Mr. Schlafly, could you please delete the Robert Penn Walker page? It was meant to be made under the name Robert Penn Warren, and all the information from the Walker page has been moved to the Warren page.--Nathan (talk) 18:24, 29 May 2017 (EDT)

Done.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:24, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

Hitler and Haj Amin al-Husseini

This image of the Mufti explains a lot, should be fair use.

http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Mufti_And_Hitler.jpg

Yes, I agree. Thanks for finding and posting it.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:23, 4 June 2017 (EDT)

PS Eagles > Popular articles at Conservapedia

Dear Mr. Schlafly: I can understand your desire to cross-promote your other website on Conservapedia, and I have the utmost respect for Mrs. Schlafly's career. Do you think there may be a better way to promote the other organization than to add a link to the other website as a part of the list of "Popular articles at Conservapedia" since it is not at Conservapedia? Perhaps you could please reconsider your edit? Thanks, JDano (talk) 15:26, 5 June 2017 (EDT)

I did consider your suggestion but the bottom line is that the other website has information by Phyllis Schlafly and photos of interest to many people. It is unnecessary to create a separate category for it on the main page. It is clearly displayed as an external link by the Wiki software.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2017 (EDT)
The current Main Page design has too much information under too few headings. I think our design objectives should be to briefly state the purpose and goals of Conservapedia and to promote our content. As a secondary purpose, the main page can steer readers to non-Conservapedia content. The right column seems to have the promote non-CP function because most news items do not link to our articles, but rather to external news sources. We could divide the right column into two headings: "Other sites of interest" and then "Current news". You could negotiate a reciprocal link agreement with a few other like-minded websites, and put the links (or link and short description or tile ads) in the "Other Sites of Interest" section. Then below that, have a "Current News" section with the bullets as you do now. I would suggest writing a template to cut off what is being displayed at 25 items, with the rest autoarchived off the Main Page. This would make the main page more appealing and would distinguish between what is Conservapedia (the left column) and what is not (the right column). While the details of my proposal may not be optimum, with the input of others, you could develop a better plan than to put external links into the "Popular articles at Conservapedia" section. Thank you for considering this. JDano (talk) 09:47, 6 June 2017 (EDT)
Slightly off-subject, I would also modify the template to rotate through Conserapedia's image library, so that there would be a photo on the main page. Our photos are no longer represented on the Main Page except for Tiger Wood's mug shot. Thanks, JDano (talk) 11:56, 6 June 2017 (EDT)

Is this logo off limits for me to upload here? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:59, 9 June 2017 (EDT)

The problem is the lack of a license, not the content. We don't have a clear enough right to copy and post the obscure logo. Thanks for asking.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:05, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

Please move Joseph Belloc to Hilaire Belloc

I know nothing about the subject matter, but this was requested by AlanE, whom I trust as perhaps the most erudite person on this site. See his request on my talk page here. That diff has a lot of irrelevant stuff, but he is complaining that "the lads" (I assume that refers to some new users—DavidB4 and 1990sguy, who have been doing a lot of renaming work lately) have gotten preoccupied with the abcqwe matter and aren't paying attention to the right things. I'm staying out of this, but would you please look into the matter? SamHB (talk) 18:23, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

I did a little research, and as expected, found Alen was right. I've moved it. --David B (TALK) 20:21, 10 June 2017 (EDT)

Is this article appropriate to cite?

I cited this article to the Donald Trump achievements article I am working on. However, JDano opposes me citing the article. What do you think about this? I made a discussion topic on Conservapedia:Community Portal as well. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:38, 14 June 2017 (EDT)

It is fine to cite that newsworthy article. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:56, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
There are two Brettbart articles. The first one was a straight news story about three people being arrested for performing female genital mutilation on two Minnesota girls in a clinic outside of Detroit. The second article, the one at issue, is an ax-griding piece that has the following points:
  • Trump Has a New Policy - there is nothing to show that the policy changed in April from the "old" Trump policy or the policy under the Obama administration.
  • There is "a national campaign" to eradicate FGM. This was an action brought by the US Attorney in Michigan, not some newly-announced task force.
  • That one media critic is complaining that there is not enough MSM coverage of this "new national campaign" - perhaps because it does not exist.
  • That the critic says that is due to "political correctness" and "fear of offending Muslims" - but it could be due to the fact that the government is not bringing religion into this and does not want to set up the defense counsel with a "religious defense" to the criminal charges. This is speculation.
  • That a few MSM media stories have followed the government' lead in the bringing religion into this.
  • The story then conclude with an attack on the MSM as "conspicuously silent on this case and their silence is deafening" and "aiding and abetting violence against women out of a politically correct fueled fear of offending Muslims." On the whole, this is an advocacy piece trying to bootstrap a failure of the MSM to play up the religion angle so as to explain why they did not report on the dramatic launch of a "new national campaign" when there apparently is no such campaign.
I think the article is very misleading, and plays into the hands of those who would assert that this prosecution is anti-Muslim motivated. We don't need to cite it. We have now fixed the Donald Trump achievements article to just focus on the individual prosecution. I have been trying to take any mention of religion out of the article bullet as well, because neither the statute nor the indictment mentions religion. Thanks, JDano (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
Nobody's asserting that the prosecution is motivated by "Islamophobia," and the article certainly does not say that. It is noting that this practice is one that is promoted by the leaders of sects of Islam. It is also noting MSM bias in covering the story. The MSM cannot admit that certain sects of Islam promote this practice. We know the religon and even the sect (the Dawoodi Bohra sect) of those who committed the crimes. They are crimes nonetheless. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:11, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
1990sguy is shifting position. Should CP and the MSM throw in the Muslim issue when the government did not mention it or should the MSM be criticised for failing to make a big deal because the MSM did not realize that this was a "new policy" and a "new nation-wide campaign"? The Breitbart article is grasping at straws and is misleading. It does not support the bullet as written. Let's give Andy a chance to read the article and to respond to the concerns. JDano (talk) 20:19, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
In what way am I shifting my position? Why did you say the MSM is "throwing in the Muslim issue"? Much the opposite: the MSM is failing to note that. I added the source not to talk about "the Muslim issue," but rather to record a notable achievement made by Presdient Trump, and I still believe this article succeeds in this. And because you are obsessing about the whoIle Muslim thing, this article does present a legitimate point of view -- that the MSM is failing to note the fact that FGM is a primarily Muslim practice out of political correctness -- that we should not censor. This article is appropriate to add. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:35, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
I contend that neither the DOJ nor Conservapedia have injected religion into this case. Neither has the MSM. The Brietbart says that is because of "fear of offending Muslims." I say that is because of avoiding a legal trap, but Conservapedia does not speculate on DOJ motives, so we don't need to put Breitbart in the footnote. As to the alternative reading, which is a "new nation-wide campaign" that the MSM is failing to report, the fact is that there is no evidence of a new nation-wide campaign and that the DOJ under both Trump and Obama have opposed FGM. If you want to add this as an example of media bias, go ahead, but I think this is a bad example of bias. JDano (talk) 20:45, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
I don't know that it counts as speculation to say it is related to political correctness. They have been regularly acting for political reasons, rather than for reason of Justice. However, it may be presumptive to call it a campaign when there doesn't seen to be any evidence of a concerted effort. --David B (TALK) 21:41, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
The article calls it a campaign, but it does not mean we have to. I sometimes cite MSM sources, but it doesn't mean I use the wording or the presuppositions of the MSM. This Breitbart article is not as bad as many of the articles from the MSM and liberal media. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2017 (EDT)
You have already agreed that the article was wrong about the Department of Justice conducting a "new" nationwide campaign to prosecute FGM. Why can't anyone find a statement from DOJ in Washington about this? The article is misleading. JDano (talk) 11:01, 15 June 2017 (EDT)
Everyone except you sees no problem with the article. You lost. Besides, prosecuting three people for this, the first time since the law was passed, is a notable achievement. It may be editorial wording, but it is a big achievement. Besides, this article, which is the "straight news story" that you mentioned states the DOJ as saying "the Department of Justice is committed to stopping female genital mutilation in this country, and will use the full power of the law to ensure that no girls suffer such physical and emotional abuse." This is not far off from a national campaign. Just let it go. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:14, 15 June 2017 (EDT)

Please give skipcaptcha and page deletion rights to User:Wikignome72

Please give skipcaptcha and page deletion rights to the User:Wikignome72 account. This is the account that will be used for the project we corresponded about recently via email. Conservative (talk) 18:30, 18 June 2017 (EDT)

Thanks. Conservative (talk) 12:25, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

Can someone edit this template so the useful links are readable?

Useful links

Welcome!

Hello, Aschlafly, and welcome to Conservapedia!

We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.

At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!

Thanks for reading, Aschlafly!


Can someone edit this template so the useful links are readable?

The blue links on a dark red background is hard to read.

Also, some people have started to edit Conservapedia and then quickly gave up because they didn't know how to edit a wiki. I noted about 3 people who did this. There are probably many more who quit but didn't say anything. I added a link entitled "How to edit a wiki". But I believe there are various versions of the welcome template so my link is not on all welcome template versions. For example, the welcome template that JPatt uses didn't incorporate my "How to edit a wiki" link.

Does the newest version of the Wikimedia software allow for WYSIWYG editing? In other words "What you see is what you get".

The newest version of the Wikimedia software does not have the counter at the bottom of the pages. I understand why Andy Schlafly likes the counters at the bottom. I like the counters too. I guess there might be an extension to add the counters to the newest version of Wikimedia. But after all is said and done, having WYSIWYG editing could greatly increase the participation rate at this wiki and lower the rate of people falling out because they don't know how to edit a wiki. Conservative (talk) 18:40, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

Here is the welcome to Wikipedia and it is much better and legible

[[File:Plate of cookies.jpg|thumb|300px|Some cookies to welcome you! [[File:Face-smile.svg|25px]]]] [[Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia|Welcome to Wikipedia]], Conservative! I am [[User:This lousy T-shirt|This lousy T-shirt]] and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/Knox490|your contributions]]. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions check out [[Wikipedia:Questions]], or feel free to leave me a message on [[User talk:This lousy T-shirt|my talk page]] or type ''{{tl|helpme}}'' at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: * [[Wikipedia:Introduction|Introduction]] * [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|The five pillars of Wikipedia]] * [[Wikipedia:How to edit a page|How to edit a page]] * [[Help:Contents|Help pages]] * [[Wikipedia:Article development|How to write a great article]] *[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ten_Simple_Rules_for_Editing_Wikipedia Ten Simple Rules for Editing Wikipedia]. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a [[Wikipedia:Wikipedians|Wikipedian]]! Also, when you post on [[Wikipedia:Talk page|talk pages]] you should [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|sign your name]] using four tildes (<nowiki>~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. Again, welcome!

I think Conservapedia needs a better greeting. Conservative (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2017 (EDT)

I put <nowiki> tags around the message to remove all of the redlinks, I doubt we'll ever have a page called Wikipedia:Five pillars. StephenA (talk) 11:45, 22 June 2017 (EDT)
Ed Poor changed the welcome template to a more readable background color. So things are moving in a positive direction. Conservative (talk) 09:07, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
How does Template:Greeting look? I'm not sure I like dark blue links on light blue background, but red background is worse. Does anyone have suggestions? --David B (TALK) 21:08, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
It looks fabulous to me! Well done.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 22:00, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
I would recommend having a brighter background color. Dark blue background and black text is not ideal. Also, if it could incorporate the "useful links" template or a very similar "useful links" template that is perhaps a different color, that would be good too. Conservative (talk) 22:13, 23 June 2017 (EDT)

DavidB4, I was in a bit of rush. Thanks so much for doing this. I really appreciate it. I made a few changes. Hopefully, you like them and will keep them. Again, thanks for doing what you have done so far. Conservative (talk) 22:44, 23 June 2017 (EDT)

Thanks, Mr. Schlafly!
Conservative, I agree with background, but having a little color there might be good. I just haven't found the right combination and shade. As for "useful links," I tried to incorporate most of those links in the text, but I did leave out one or perhaps two (I forget now) which I couldn't seem to fit in. Do you think I should just include those links as well, or add in the actual list, perhaps on the side? That would seem a little repetitive, but maybe it would be good because the links would by compiled in one place. --David B (TALK) 22:54, 23 June 2017 (EDT)
Also, that edit is fine. That page name is a bit lengthy, but it makes more sense. --David B (TALK) 23:20, 23 June 2017 (EDT)

Useful links template on the side of the welcome might be good. Conservative (talk) 00:57, 24 June 2017 (EDT)

Also, incorporating a friendly picture would be good. I like the idea of having a cookies picture which Wikipedia uses. People generally welcome people via food. Conservative (talk) 01:00, 24 June 2017 (EDT)
A picture seems like a good idea, but using cookies seems a bit like plagiarism, even if we use a different photo. Is there some other kind of photo we could use? --David B (TALK) 00:05, 26 June 2017 (EDT)
Have the word "Welcome!" under/above a pic of a welcome fruit basket. Please see Google images to get an idea of welcome fruit baskets: Google images - Welcome fruit baskets. Here are some FREE IMAGES of welcome fruit baskets at: https://pixabay.com/en/photos/?hp=&image_type=&cat=&min_width=&min_height=&q=fruit+basket&order=
Or for $1.00 you can get a stock photo of a welcome fruit basket at: https://www.shutterstock.com/search/similar/350093981 Conservative (talk) 00:22, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

Three requests

Hello Andy, I have three requests,

1) Would you please protect the articles God, Satan, and Hell? All the edits in the recent past, as you can see in the edit summaries, are just vandalism (especially the article about God).

2) Would you please take a look at the article fake news? I am in a dispute with editors who I believe are adding content is liberal bias.[12] We need clarity on what to add.

3) Would you please create a "Category:Koch Puppets." I think if we are going to have such a category on articles, we should have a link. It does not look encyclopedic to just have a red link, and some readers may even view it as libel. A page for the category is much more appropriate.

Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 12:53, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

1) I'm reluctant to protect those entries simply due to some sporadic vandalism. I want to keep entries like that open as much as possible.
2) I'll look at the fake news dispute.
3) There is an entry Category:Koch puppets. Is it a red link on your screen? The category seems to work fine (P.S. - I did just add a period to it to create it). Politics require calling something what it is, in order to be informative. The evidence is overwhelming.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:25, 26 June 2017 (EDT)
Thank you. Would you please capitalize the "P" in the category to make in line with other CP categories that capitalize all first words? I respect your decision to not protect any of the articles I requested, but in the article God, literally, about 80 of the most recent 100 edits (I did not look further than that) are vandalism-related. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:07, 26 June 2017 (EDT)
I looked at the edits to God over the past two months and about half were legitimate, when a vandalism/revert pair is counted as just one edit. It seems worth keeping open. Even one insightful edit out of 100 uninformative ones would be worthwhile. I also capitalized the initial letter in "puppet". Thanks for your observations and suggestions.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:49, 26 June 2017 (EDT)

EPA and the Waters of the United States

Hi Andy. I've been hearing about the value of EPA rules preventing water pollution, which I care about since I drink water (or water-based products like coffee ;-) and I know that wildlife require clean drinking water, too. On the other hand, I've been hearing a lot of stories over the years on how EPA regulations make it inordinately expensive for farmers to do things (on their own property) that used to be routine: such as filling in a swamp to make more acreage for crops, or digging an irrigation ditch. Should it cost them five times my annual income just to file the paperwork for that?

Anyway, I've started a draft article about the Waters of the United States rule which you, as a lawyer, will understand better than most of us. I'm interested in the controversy mainly as a clash between different hopes and dreams. I daresay that conservationists want to protect wildlife, while people who eat food (or sell it to them) will want more cropland put to use. The proposed article covers a lot of ground. --Ed Poor Talk 12:02, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

Thanks, Ed, for starting an entry about this important issue. I've added to it and will edit it further. I, too, like clean water but over-regulation can be harmful as well.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:17, 28 June 2017 (EDT)

Donald Trump achievements: going forward

Hello Andy, as you know, I have been working on the Donald Trump achievements article series. I have enjoyed expanding it, and it has received over 68,500 views in six months.

However, the article is getting quite long. I think it is best that I create sub-articles for it. I thought I would split the articles by either year or half year (for example, the main article, and then links to sub-articles about Trump's achievements in 2017, 2018, and so on; or an article on his achievements in the first half of 2017, second half of 2017, and so on). What do you think I should do? Do you have another preference?

Splitting the article by topic area is another option, but a big problem with this is the fact that some achievements could be placed in multiple categories. It would also take much longer and be more messy transferring information.

Regardless, I would appreciate your thoughts. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 10:15, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly: a number of editors have been discussing this.[13] I suggest that we have some form of organized group discussion that is not dominated by any one user before you reach a final decision. This is different than the main page right news items, where items are trimmed and archived throughout the year. The current format treats all bullets equally. It is very difficult to do serious cite checking and copy editing. It is difficult to maintain encyclopedic perspective, tone and quality given the "hot off the presses" format of the current article. The article does attempt to cover many important facts, but the bullet list format prevents placing those facts into an understandable context. Efforts spent on this article distract from placing the same substance in the pre-existing articles covering the same ideas.
We need consensus on the article's mission and criteria for inclusion.
There are various approaches to limiting its growth. For example, we could limit the article to items in which President Trump played a direct role. Or we could place a limit on the maximum number of bullets, which would require an editor to delete one if he is going to add a new one.
The article was written in response to President Trump promising to do a lot of things early in his administration, either on the first day or during the first 100 days. Now that we are past the first 100 days, we need to find a way to maintain a workable usable encyclopedia article. Thanks, JDano (talk) 12:17, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
The fact that every achievement has been covered in multiple conservative (and MSM) news outlets shows that every achievement in the article is appropriate. Besides, how do we come up with a "context" for "important" and "unimportant" achievements? Not even historians with PhDs writing about people, nations, and events that happened hundreds and even thousands of years ago can agree on these things. And no, we are not going to "limit" this article to only stuff that Trump played a "direct" role (how do you even define "direct"?). Every single Trump Administration apointee and judge confirmed after 2017 has his or her position directly because of Trump. Trump played a direct role in what they did through this, even if he did not order the specific action they may have taken. --1990'sguy (talk) 12:49, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
We need agreed-upon criteria. If not a limit on total number of bullets, then some notability test could be used. If not that, then some connection to Donald Trump -- that Trump played a necessary but not sufficient role in the achievement -- or a "but for" test, whatever the group thinks is fair and workable. What we have now is too long, unusable and without any criteria. Some "achievements" like issuing a proclaimation for "Loyalty Day" or sending Vice President Pence to give a speech could easily be trimmed. Thanks, JDano (talk) 13:08, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
I completely disagree. And we already discussed this. We don't need any silly "criteria" that will delete half the article. I already stated, all of these achievements have been reported by multiple media sources, including conservative media sources. They clearly viewed these achievements as real achievements (and these actions are only a fraction of everything the Trump Administration did), so it is good that we do likewise. If any achievement is questionable as an achievement, we can discuss it. It's easy, and you want to add what I believe are bureaucratic restrictions to what we can add. If something is clearly an achievement, some formal "criteria" will prevent us from adding it, maybe even because of a "limit" on the number of restrictions we can add, as you just floated above.
And to respond to your "loyalty day" criticism, this is one of 55 (as of today) proclamations that Trump issued. The proclamation shows Trump's commitment to conservative principles and is strongly-worded. An offical United States government document in 2010 that commits to conservative values. THAT is an achievement.
To respond to your Mike Pence criticism, he was the FIRST vice president in U.S. history to speak at the March for Life event, and the highest U.S. government official to date to speak at it. THAT is an achievement. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:29, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
After reviewing the discussion, I agree with 1990'sguy - please create related entries for Donald Trump achievements. The related entries will help keep the size of the original reasonable, and will provide greater focus. Thanks and well done!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:42, 29 June 2017 (EDT)
I will do that. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:43, 29 June 2017 (EDT)

One more thing: is it a good idea to add notable Supreme Court decisions to the article series? There was some discussion regarding this at Talk:Donald Trump achievements#Notable Court Cases. --1990'sguy (talk) 02:32, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

Dear Mr. Schlafly, this issue is being discussed on the article talk page. This is the third time that User:1990'sguy has run over here, reframed the issue in a misleading way, and then used your response as a substitute for group discussion and consensus building. The question is if Breitbart has an item about the Supreme Court denying a cert petition that was filed before President Trump took office, should it be included in the Donald Trump achievement article? In general, listing court decisions in this article seems to contradict what you have been teaching about separation of powers and the role of Article III courts. User:1990'sguy is not limiting the scope of this section to just federal cases or Supreme Court cases. Can we please have one discussion over on the article talk page? Thanks, JDano (talk) 05:59, 30 June 2017 (EDT)
JDano, I linked the talk page discussion above. Andy can freely check if he wants. I am asking him here because I don't want another never-ending discussion with you that wastes all my time. Andy owns this site, so I will let him make the decision. By the way, the cert petition was rejected AFTER Trump took office. When you look on the talk page, you are clearly advocating for deleting the entire section, rather than simply one small mention of a cert denial. The Supreme Court had a direct role in every case I mentioned in the section, and Trump has, and will have, a direct role in the composition in the Court, and by extension, the descisions of the Court. Imagine if Reagan appointed a conservative in 1981 rather than O'Connor. Roe v. Wade would have been overturned. --1990'sguy (talk) 12:29, 30 June 2017 (EDT)
I think notable Supreme Court decisions would be a welcome addition to the series. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:02, 30 June 2017 (EDT)

Inquiry

I have decided to use the account of my late friend George, as he gave me permission to do so at any time and I once contributed an article using this account while George was still alive. Since there are no rules against sharing accounts that I'm unaware of, do you think that the account should be renamed? Many thanks in advance for attention to this inquiry. --GFitz (talk) 15:24, 2 July 2017 (EDT)

We generally don't rename accounts. Please just open a new account for yourself.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
I see. I'm assuming there's no way to merge account histories or anything of that sort? (Since this was a shared account) So I should create a new account instead of using this one? --GFitz (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
There is a way to rename an account. Seems like you'd prefer that. What is the new name you would like? Please let me know and, if available, then I will rename the account (and all the edits) for you. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:40, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
It would make more sense to do so, I believe. "RonaldB" would be the new name for the account. Thank you much. --GFitz (talk) 15:44, 2 July 2017 (EDT)
Done as requested. Thanks for suggesting this.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:52, 2 July 2017 (EDT)

More issues with the D.T. achievements article

Andy, would you please comment on two unresolved issues at Talk:Donald Trump achievements? The first is found in the "Notable Court Cases" section and revolves around the "Binderup" case, which the Supreme Court rejected to hear and thus advanced some Second Amendment rights.

The second is in the section entitled "Border patrol raid --> appropriate to add?", and it involves whether to add "criteria" on whether or not to add achievements (other than the rule that the achievements must advance conservative ideals). I oppose adding any additional bureaucratic criteria that will result in half the article's content being deleted. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:35, 3 July 2017 (EDT)

I would appreciate it, Andy, if you would give your input on these matters. The discussion about establishing additional "criteria" besides that an achievement advanced conservative policies/ideals is very long. I think such a criteria would do more harm than good and is a scheme to delete half the article's content (which, as we can see in the discussion above, are all real achievements that we should note). --1990'sguy (talk) 14:59, 4 July 2017 (EDT)1990'sguy
I agree completely with you about this, 1990'sguy. Let's avoid additional criteria.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:44, 4 July 2017 (EDT)

French environmental policy

Andy, would it be OK if you add the info that I posted to Talk:Main Page about France's new environmental policies to comply with the Paris deal to Template:Mainpageright? --1990'sguy (talk) 16:55, 7 July 2017 (EDT)

I would appreciate it if you would reply to my request, even if a negative. I do personally this is worth reporting. It is a very extreme action,[14][15][16] and it follows France's decision to stop granting oil/gas exploration permits in France and its territories.[17] --1990'sguy (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2017 (EDT)
In addition to the above, would you please consider adding this story, of how children in a private Christian school in Sweden cannot talk about the Bible or say "Amen", but they can give thanks to the sun and rain (paganism)?[18] --1990'sguy (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2017 (EDT)
Thanks, I just posted the article about Sweden. In general, however, our news on MPR should typically relate to the U.S., or the U.K. The news from France about what they might do nearly 25 years from now is a bit remote. Thanks for your suggestions.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:58, 9 July 2017 (EDT)
I appreciate your posting, but I encourage you to reconsider the policy of ignoring Europe in favor of the U.S. and U.K. (even though I do support a greater emphasis for the U.S./U.K.). Continental Europe (including Scandanavia) is the result of left-wing policies, and American liberals admire it and support us becoming more like Europe (homeschooling ban, anti-religious liberty, speech restrictions, gun control, pro-abortion/homosexuality, European Union, no borders, globalism, etc.). If the American Left has its way, what is going on in Europe is a model for what will happen in the U.S. I think we need to cover at least some European news to show people what the goals of liberalism are. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:10, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
Good points, thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

I have found some other news stories for your consideration: the executive producers of the God's Not Dead series donated $25,000 to repair the smashed Ten Commandments monument in Arkansas.

Also, the Anglican Church is becoming very liberal in regards to transgender issues. It voted in favor of having ceremonies marking one's "sexual transition."[19] --1990'sguy (talk) 21:28, 11 July 2017 (EDT)

The Anglican (Episcopalian) church is very small in the U.S. So while this story is shocking, it is of limited American interest. The story about the $25,000 donation is heartwarming charity, but why isn't the vandal paying for the damage he caused? Or why isn't the legislature stepping up the plate to fund repairs, as they would for virtually every other type of vandalism?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:06, 13 July 2017 (EDT)
Just as a note, the Anglican Church in North America is a more conservative branch in the US created in response to the liberalism in the Episcopal Church, and there are still some conservative Episcopal parishes in the US. So, there are still some conservative expressions of Anglicanism in the US, mostly under the authority of Anglican Bishops located in Africa. --Anglican (talk) 15:29, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

Move/delete request

Hello Andy, would you please move Wayne County, Michogan in order to correct the mis-spelling of "Michigan", and would you then delete that redirect? Thanks.

Also, as always, I would appreciate it if you would at least comment on my new MPR requests just above, even if you don't think they should be added. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:18, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

The page creator created a new article for the Michigan county, but the misspelled page still needs to be deleted. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:57, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

One more request: Would you please move Donald Trump achievements: Criminal justice, law enforcement, and other matters pertaining to the DOJ to Donald Trump achievements: Criminal justice, law enforcement, and other DOJ matters, and then delete the redirect? The new title says the same thing, but more precise. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:45, 13 July 2017 (EDT)

Dispute resolution request

Would you please solve yet another dispute I have with JDano? This time, it revolves around the Constitutional carry article.

I think JDano's edits do not improve the article, and actually, make it worse. He adds unnecessary links that are already linked to in the article, does improper capitalization at times, adds "ninja stars" to the list of weapons (is this a real/serious weapon?), and once again, he continues his anti-Breitbart News bias, trying to delegitimize a pro-gun Breitbart writer as an "opinion columnist" (there is no reason to add that label; JDano today cited the anti-gun Brady group in the [[gun control article and did not label it as an "opinion source"). His edits also give a bias against constitutional carry: he replaces a line explaining the legal grounding of the position with one casting a negative light on the movement, saying it causes confusion.

Please mediate. Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:07, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

I agree with your points. Please feel free to make your edits and use your blocking powers if necessary.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:23, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
JDano also has blocking authority. I thus do not have any authority to block him or do any other type of discipline on him. I need an admin to enforce your support. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:31, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
What does JDano's blocking authority have to do with this? What does it have to do with your course of action? Are you suggesting that you only bully people weaker than yourself, and won't bully people who might hit back? That's the kind of mentality that one sees in playground ruffians in grade school. You do not have the authority to block him over a content dispute. I've copied this before (twice, I think), and it seems to have sunk in to some people, but it seems that it needs saying again. As per the Conservapedia:Guidelines:
The block function has been devolved to select users who have shown an ability to be trusted. Many of the current Administrators started as one of these Assistants and this status can be considered a way to evaluate users for promotion. As "emergency Sysops", the authority of these users is limited to warning users of policy violations and blocking for blatant vandalism and harassment requiring an immediate response.
Note that these "assistants" are being "evaluated for promotion", that is, their status is probationary.
A "blockocracy" is even worse than a "mobocracy". We shouldn't have people running around blocking people to get their way, as though this were a video game. (We have had such people in the past, as Markman once admitted to me.)
@Andy: I hope you are not condoning this kind of attitude.
@JDano: Please do not tempt people to behave badly. Put in accurate edit summaries.
@1990 and JDano: Please try to avoid revert wars.
SamHB (talk) 19:13, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
Part of that comment was directed at myself, and I will respond: I genuinely think JDano is inserting liberal bias into the article. I don't know if it is intentional, but the fact that even when I tell him, even multiple times, that I disagree with them and why, he continues to revert, using deceptive edit summaries and not going to the talk page, as if there is no edit war when there is. This has happened multiple times in the past, and every time, JDano was alone (or only joined by explicitly liberal editors). His behavior is so disruptive that I probably would be forced (let me make myself clear -- not happily) to block him. His behavior needs to change. Now. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:21, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
I have reviewed edits by the user and taken away some privileges, including unblocking privileges, away from the account. You can block the account as appropriate, now or in the future, or let me know know if there are additional issues with it. Thanks for your edits.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:01, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
Wait--are you saying that you have given 1990'sguy explicit permission to violate CP policy? SamHB (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2017 (EDT)

Unfortunately, 1990sguy is no gentleman and failed to notify me of this thread. The basic problem is that there is bad writing on Conservapedia, which I and others try to correct in several regards:

  • Pronouns should have clear antecedents, and the order of clauses in sentences need to be rearranged to avoid dangling modifiers. When I do that, 1990sguy undoes that as a act of bullying.
  • I do not have a leftist POV, I have been a conservative for most of my adult life. However, I want to avoid needless repetition and weak arguments. You can't write a concise Gun control article by repeatedly saying "critics say it violates the Second Amendment", you have to bring in a variety of ideas and explain how the Second Amendment applies. So, when I remove a parenthetical about the Second Amendment being violated that is wedged in between two other sentences that discuss the Second Amendment, I am improving the article.
  • I am not a complete "enemy of Breitbart." However, all news organizations hire three types of people: ads salesmen, journalists and opinion columnists. When you cite to a news organization, we assume that you are citing to what a journalist has written. In the case of Breitbart, Awr Hawkins is described by Breitbart as a columnist rather than as a reporter. If Hawkins reports a fact, he is summarizing some other source, such as a study or a news story. It would be best if we cite Hawkins' source rather than Hawkins, because he has been known to selectively bend the facts to fit his arguments. When we identify Hawkins, we can so so as "an opinion columnist for Breitbart.com" just as we can identify David Brooks as an opinion columnist for the New York Times.
  • The two article that I have been editing today are largely the product of User:TheAmericanRedoubt, who could not write clearly and frequently had his facts wrong. So, TAR added a detailed section to the Constitutional carry article with a blow-by-blow account of how Idaho passed a concealed carry statute, but failed to mention the drafting flaw that made it legal to carry a hand gun within city limits, but not any other deadly weapon. I took out his self-serving account of how is favorite organization had lobbied for the Idaho law, and added a reference from the state sheriff's association explaining the law and its drafting flaw.
  • The gun control article made it sound as though there was a national upsurge in states seeking to pass laws exempting strictly intrastate commerce in guns from federal regulation. Only one state passed such a law and it was immediately enjoined by a district court and affirmed by the 9th Circuit. So, instead of a mass movement, there was an interesting legal theory that was immediately shot down. It could be that TAR wrote the article before the decision, but given the 9th Circuit decision, the article was wrong.

The point is that these are complex matters and we are trying to balance the need for detail with the need for concise writing. Having 1990sguy hound me at every turn and undo every edit without reading the material or checking the sources is very unhelpful and violates the Conservapedia commandments. I hope that you will reconsider as you did not have the opportunity to hear both sides, and that you will weight the hundreds of hours of volunteer service that I have donated before encountering the hostile hounding of 1990sguy. Thanks, JDano (talk) 20:17, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

Thank you for actually commenting on your edits. You might have really helped in this dispute if you did this right at the beginning, rather than after having your user rights taken away. To reply to what you said, I am not a "bully", I am not "hounding" you, nor are my actions directed at you personally. You brought this on yourself by making edits that I believe have a clear liberal bias (such as calling constitutional carry a "propaganda" term and removing multiple Breitbart references from different articles, among other edits in different articles), and by not handling the resulting disputes well -- as it was you who was changing the status quo in articles, you should have gone to the talk page after the first revision and explained why your changes were correct. You should have been honest in your edit summaries and been willing to concede various points. I have done these things, but you constantly reverted edits without giving an explanation, you used deceptive edit summaries that did not acknowledge you were reverting my edits, you did not go to the talk page, you took what was almost an all-or-nothing editing approach (I did concede numerous points, but I strongly opposed your other changes) and would not stop until you got all you wanted, and you did not learn from the several disputes we had. If I reverted your edits only partially, you would often still even revert that I did, using edit summaries such as "trimming", rather than acknowledging you were reverting my edits. You repeated the same unbearable behaviors over and over again, even though it did you not good. I have given a lot of evidence of inserting liberal bias into articles, on this talk page, on Jpatt's, on the community portal, on the pages of the various articles we had disputes over. I'm not going to go into it again. If your edits were good faith, you should have gone to the talk page and explained why they were the right choice, rather than hiding them under deceptive edit summaries, which makes other editors like me even more convinced they are bad edits. You brought this upon yourself, and if there is any reason why I reverted (or partially reverted, which I did more often) your edits in multiple articles, it is because I saw your edits, and I did not think they were constructive, and because of your editing behavior, which remained the same.
JDano, I want to work with you on CP. I don't want to punish you. But, I also don't want to see you make bad edits that have no consensus, or for you to continue in your editing behaviors that make you very hard for me to work with. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:48, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
To summarize the above if one reads between the lines, 1990sguy feels that he has license to follow another long-standing experienced editor around and revert every edit that he makes because 1990sguy feels honor bound to defend "the status quo" instead of evaluating the current text of the article. Do not follow other editors around and revert all of their edits. It is not as though you are our supervisor. The other editors involved recently in these pages, SamHB and Whiterose, recognized the same problems with the article that I was trying to address and 1990sguy was trying to perpetuate. To quote Whiterose, "I really think this article needs to be toned down a notch. Some Conservatives can accept it, sure, but saying that gun control if a leftist conspiracy to confiscate everyone's firearms is not going to help convert people to Conservatism." Gun control is a complicated issue with many aspects and viewpoints and the article needs a lot of work to be accurate and to reflect the areas of controversy. Again, we need a reasonable editing environment, not one where an editor follows around a second editor with hounding and harrassment. JDano (talk) 22:42, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
JDano, I find 1990'sguy to have made justifiable criticisms, and he is free to use his blocking authority. In addition to changing the introduction of the popular gun control entry in a way that obscured the liberal push for it, you inserted this sentence: "So, to the extent that opponents of gun control laws claim that the government is trying to "take away" guns, such [forfeiture] provisions are the focus of their concerns." [20] That is not what most opponents of gun control are focusing on when they talk about the government trying to take away guns.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:28, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Request

Sure, I will do it soon when I have enough time to dedicate to it. Do you think that the additional books should be included in the Old Testament section, or in a separate "Apocryphal" section? --Anglican (talk) 19:51, 1 July 2017 (EDT) I finished the first half of Tobit. Hopefully using the 1611 KJV was fine because that is the only edition of the KJV to include these texts and I am not sure if a less archaic edition is in the public domain. Did you want to add these texts to the template? --Anglican (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2017 (EDT)

JDano

JDano is continuing to insert leftist pov, this time in the gun control article. Once again, he delegitimizes Breitbart News,[21] while treating liberal sources like the Brady Campaign better than it.[22] He continually reverts to edits like this without even explaining it to me. We have seen his behavior in Donald Trump achievements, Fake News, Travel ban, Constitutional carry, and now this. He and I have technically the same rank, so I cannot do anything about him other than bringing these issues to admins (and, frankly, I am not receiving much help).

He is not going to the talk pages of articles, he is not making concessions even though I have, and he is not recognizing that multiple editors other than myself disagree with him on his edits and think they have a liberal bias.

Please help. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:07, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

I have edited only three main space articles on July 14, 2017: Gun control, Constitutional carry, and Open-Carry Movement. Shortly after I edited each one 1990sguy followed me around and edited them only after I did and not earlier than me. If he was not hounding me, how does he explain why he chose those articles to edit today? JDano (talk) 22:58, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
The reason why I reverted your edits on those articles this is not that I am "hounding" you, but your behavior in previous articles is so that I now watch your edits more closely. You have persistent unconstructive editing behaviors that make you unworkable and you add content that every other editor thinks has a liberal bias. I don't want to, but I think it is necessary. I found that your edits in these articles have the same problems. Let me make myself clear: I have not reverted all of your edits, in general, and even some edits you made in those articles I think are good. However, overall, they do not improve the article and even insert liberal bias into them. Your edits on other articles: Donald Trump achievements, Fake News, and Travel ban, show the same editing and content problems. --1990'sguy (talk) 07:23, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

JDano problems: A suggested solution

The JDano problems are going to persist. He has been exposed to much right-wing content that is father right of his views. He probably is not going to change his political views in the near term.

If the JDano problem persists, you may lose 1990sguy as an editor and possibly more editors.

I suggest stripping JDano of his blocking rights. Perhaps, he will earn back his blocking rights later. Conservative (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

Thank you, Conservative, for the message, but Andy already did what you requested after looking at JDano's edits (see the "Dispute resolution request" section above). --1990'sguy (talk) 22:03, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
The problem is that 1990sguy is a bully who does not read or research before he edits. This is not a right wing vs. left wing issue. This is writing concise accurate prose vs. string-of-name-calling that does not educate or convince any reader. Much of what he is editing warring over is not stuff that he wrote himself. He is fighting to keep TAR in place without evaluating anything more than the byte length of the article has been diminished, erroneously assuming that something "conservative" of value must have been lost. If anyone questions his missteps he is quick to scream, "liberal POV" and go off misrepresenting what he is doing on this talk page. This is not consistent with the Conservapedia Commandments. I await Mr. Schlafly's reply to my statement above. JDano (talk) 22:20, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
Concise? Did you really need to preface a Breitbart writer's name with "an opinion columnist"? In my estimation, you were being petty and a bit snide. At most, I would have added "columnist", but even that isn't necessary. It's not like Breitbart is an unknown quantity to people who visit a conservative wiki. And for people who don't know what Breitbart is, the use of a internal link is sufficient. Conservative (talk) 22:33, 14 July 2017 (EDT)
Dear Conservative, there were a lot of his reverts that make no sense. For example:
  1. taking out blockquote tags
  2. Changing "Hawkins has also pointed out that despite France having very strict gun control laws, the nation has had many Islamic terrorist attacks that used a variety of weapons, including guns and rifes." to "Hawkins has also pointed out that despite having very strict gun control laws, there have been many Islamic terrorist attacks in France." 1990sguy takes away Hawkins' point that the attacks involved guns and rifles as opposed to mowing down tourists with a truck or making a bomb.
  3. Inserting in the lede sentence that gun control laws seek to "disarm" people of the guns that they already have. The body of the article describes in detail what gun control laws regulate and how only people convicted of a crime forfeit their weapons.
  4. Reinserting an external reference to one of TAR's favorite Idaho bloggers who wrote on February 12, 2015 about holding a rally and lobbying for a bill that was passed in 2016. How is this still helpful to our readers? It is out of date and does not address the topic of "Constitutional carry". I replaced it with a more authoritative external reference from concealledcarry.com

In my opinion, there is a lack of attention to detail, and being too trigger happy to revert someone he is trying to hound and harass. JDano (talk) 23:13, 14 July 2017 (EDT)

JDano, when you make edits, you make at least 10-20 different changes to these articles: some are good -- I have never denied this -- and many others do not improve the article. And today (and some other days), you repeat the same type of edits two, three, or more times to one or more articles. This is a lot of content that you are changing, and much of it does not improve the article. I have kept much of your edits. In the Donald Trump achievements article, the fake news article, the travel ban article, and some of these, I have not fully reverted your edits. However, much of your changes do put content with a liberal bias into the article. I have to revert that -- and then you try 5-10-20 times (without giving a reason or going to the talk page) to re-add that content that I have made clear is unconstructive and why it is. If some other positive changes have gotten lost in the reverts, it is because of your editing behaviors. --1990'sguy (talk) 07:31, 15 July 2017 (EDT)

Odd image

Hello Andy, I am thinking of uploading the image shown here: [23] However, this image is odd, as it was created using Wiki code. Would it be OK if I upload it, or is it safer not to? --1990'sguy (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2017 (EDT)

If there is any concern about the security or compatibility of this, we could just take a screenshot of it, and use that. Licensing is the only issue I'm concerned about. Can we use it under the CC license they use, or should be not since although a graphic, it would be a direct copy-and-paste from WP? --David B (TALK) 17:39, 17 July 2017 (EDT)
Licensing is the only issue I have with this image. It is not a file like most Wikipedia images, and I see no licensing info. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:44, 17 July 2017 (EDT)
The licensing info is at the bottom of its page. It can be copied here, with that license and a link to it included. Attribution can be to its page history file: [24] It is a template, not an image, so that's why it looks different in terms of licensing, but its license allows copying with attribution.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:48, 17 July 2017 (EDT)
Thanks! I uploaded it. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:47, 17 July 2017 (EDT)