Difference between revisions of "User talk:Aschlafly"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Undo revision 907118 by DannyR (talk))
(Another unlock request: 4 more unlock/delete requests)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
== Post Comments Here ==
+
'''Comment here'''
==Conservanswers?==
+
Hello! I found this site recently and it has really opened my eyes. I already knew that the internet was corrupt and that Wikipedia would not listen to a conservative opinion, but I did not know that a group of people had gotten together to do something to fight it. I also realized how much of the Bible had been liberalized and dumbed down as it was translated by a small group of liberal, atheist scholars. (NIV). But I think that it would be nice to have something like wikianswers that has the same philosophy as Conservapedia, so that people could interact more within the conservative community and answer questions that may not have been considered, or to talk about problems that are downsized by the media, and that only a few people may know about. I also think that since Conservapedia is retranslating the Bible, people should be able to talk to the devout and especially righteous members of the Conservative Christian  online community here just like how we talk with our pastors or fellow brothers in Christ about the Bible. And I think that an answers site would really help.
+
  
[[User:Aliveandwell|Alive & Well]] 20:43, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
+
[[User talk:Aschlafly/Archives|Archive Index]]
 +
__TOC__
  
: I doubt that a separate URL named "conservanswers" is needed.  Wouldn't it better to have the answers and discussions at one URL, rather than dispersed among two?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 00:04, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
 
  
== Question ==
+
==You archived ''way'' too much!==
I just found your site and think it is wonderful.  This summer my son wants to take the Micro economics CLEP test.  I wanted to find a good study guide that would teach him true ecomomics lessons, rather than liberal economics.  Will this prepare him to take and pass the CLEP? Are the answers posted somewhere on you site for your Final exam given. Or is there a way for him to send the exam to you and then you return graded.  Is there a cost to this course?  Thank you, and have a great summer.
+
  
:The free courses on ''Conservapedia'' are excellent preparation for the corresponding [[CLEP]] exams, and many students who have taken these courses (including the Microeconomics one) have then passed the CLEP examCorrect answers are frequently posted but typically not the correct exam answers; instead, I grade the exam answers that are posted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:38, 23 May 2011 (EDT)
+
Please restore everything from "Is this article appropriate to cite?" onwardThat material, particularly the last few sections, was extremely relevant to ongoing issues, especially discussions that I was involved in and want to comment on further. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 19:15, 19 August 2017 (EDT)
  
== New namespace for the CBP ==
+
:Time to move on to other issues here, Sam.  The world doesn't stop spinning to await resolution of endless debate about something.  You can copy the debate from the archive and move it to the talk page for the relevant entry, but I encourage you to let it go and address new issues instead.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:19, 19 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
Thank you for the page move of Eclipse. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 13:39, 20 August 2017 (EDT)
  
I'd like to share some thoughts on how to present the CBP more effectively on Conservapedia.
+
== Move requests ==
  
1. At the moment, the only way to quote from the CBP is by cut-and-paste: you have to find the verse you are looking for - e.g., John 20:2 - at the appropriate page ([[John 15-21 (Translated)]]) and insert it manually in the place: ''She ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other student, whom Jesus loved, and told them, "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have laid Him!" '' If the translation is improved further, each quotation has to be altered manually - if this isn't done, inconsistencies will mount up...
+
Andy, would you please move these two articles and their corresponding talk pages:
 +
*[[Donald Trump achievements: Miscellaneous political achievements]] --> [[Donald Trump achievements: Miscellaneous achievements]] (please do '''NOT''' leave a redirect)
 +
*[[Donald Trump achievements: Non-legislative or policy achievements]] --> [[Donald Trump achievements: Media and political correctness]] (please do '''NOT''' leave a redirect)
 +
--[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 16:27, 20 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Andy, would you please move these articles? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 17:40, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Done as requested.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:52, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Andy, would you please move [[British Sri Lanakn Tamil]] to [[British Sri Lankan Tamil]] without leaving a redirect to fix a spelling error? --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 09:27, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Done as requested, thanks again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 10:59, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
  
2. It's difficult to search for a specific phrase in the translation: if I look for ''Jesus'' and ''tomb'', I get 62 results. There is no possibility to limit the search to the CBP, so most of the results are from other articles. And if John 20:2 is quoted somewhere via cut-and-paste, I get this as a result, too. That is not very satisfying.
+
Andy, would you please move [[The Secure the Fence Act of 2006]] to [[Secure Fence Act of 2006]]? The first "the" is unnecessary, and the second "the" is not in the law's name (it is a typo). '''''Also,''''' when you move the article, please move the article name on these four articles: [http://www.conservapedia.com/Special:WhatLinksHere/The_Secure_the_Fence_Act_of_2006] --[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] ([[User talk:1990'sguy|talk]]) 23:29, 29 August 2017 (EDT)
  
To improve the situation, I'd like to have a namespace ''CBP'' to be created, where each verse of the Bible gets his own entry. Then the problems mentioned above disappear:
+
== Delete request ==
  
1. <nowiki>{{:CBP:John 20:2}}</nowiki> is an easy way to quote a verse, resulting in: {{CBP:John 20:2}}. Any quotation will be updated, when [[CBP:John 20:2]] is altered.
+
Andy, would you please delete [[:Category:Solar Power]], an unnecessary and empty category? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:35, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
  
2. The namespace ''CBP'' can be searched together with the main namespace - or separately. The results are more meaningful, and instead of a quite  imprecise result like [[John 15-21 (translated)]], you get the exact verses where the phrases occur, like [[CBP:John 20:2]].
+
:Done.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:01, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
  
This concept leaves room for more improvements, some of which I tried to implement for John 20:2:
+
Would you please delete these two redirect categories:
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Media_personalities&redirect=no Category:Media personalities] -- '''''please move the protected images BEFORE deleting the redirect'''''
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:High_schools&redirect=no Category:High schools]
 +
--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:05, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Andy would you please take care of these requests? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:33, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Andy, '''in addition to the above requests,''' please delete [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Roman_emperors&redirect=no Category:Roman emperors]. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:44, 3 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Done as requested!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:16, 3 September 2017 (EDT)
  
1. As said above, when typing
+
===Another fight===
  <nowiki>{{:CBP:John 20:2}}</nowiki>
+
Would you please delete [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]]. This article is just JDano's version of what the [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] article should be ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mainstream_media_and_Donald_Trump&diff=1369928&oldid=1369923 here is the difference between JDano's version and the actual version, which I think inserts irrelevant information such as polling data and the TIME magazine cover, and all the information altogether inserts a liberal bias into the article]). In the essay's intro, JDano attacks me, saying that "''Until August 2017, a group of editors worked hard to develop an encyclopedia article on this topic, but then one editor decided unilaterally to delete materials that did not agree with his personal opinions''" The information that I deleted, like I said, had a left-wing bias in it, and I was working hard with this article long before 2017 (in fact, I was the main editor of that article, so JDano is effectively praising and attacking me). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:09, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
you get the verse as a result - with a link to its page:
+
:The Essay does not mention any individual editor, and the article was started by User:Firestarter. I am open to feedback about the essay, but I believe it does a better job of exploring the tension between Donald Trump and the mainstream media.  Some of the sources that 1990sguy has deleted were in fact mainstream media sources, but I believe it is necessary to refer to the mainstream media in the process of discussing the relationship between Donald Trump and the mainstream media.  Other information was added to the essay to better explore some of the items raised in the current [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] article, including MS-13 and a false reporting of 2014 rape at the University of Virginia.  The problem is that some of the writing in the article is not clear, and 1990sguy has resisted attempts to make the text more closely reflect the sources.  I have generally stepped back from editing the current [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] article, but I believe a more accurate portrait of the current situation can be found in the essay.  Perhaps interested readers will consider both.  The essay contains 1990sguy's account of Charlottesville rather than what I had originially wrote, but as an essay, I will have the opporunity to revise it over time.  The fact that 1990sguy wrote directly to you, rather than discuss the essay with me, shows how he is unwilling to collaborate with other editors.  Many thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 17:37, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
{|class="wikitable"
+
::'''1)''' You did not name names at the top of your essay, but you are obviously criticizing me. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JDano&diff=1357464&oldid=1357362 '''You do this often'''].
| style="background: silver"|
+
::'''2)''' Yes, Firestarter created the article, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I created most of the content. You are ignoring this and falsely implying that I did not make substantial edits to the article until a week ago.
{{:CBP:John 20:2}}
+
::'''3)''' You are unilaterally changing the article's tone and theme, and you are adding irrelevant content that gives the article a liberal pov tilt. I linked your edits, and I will do it again: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mainstream_media_and_Donald_Trump&diff=1369928&oldid=1369923] A some of your changes are meaningless (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), irrelevant (polling data, TIME Magazine cover), and a lot of it accepts the MSM's narrative of certain incidents (the Pheonix rally section). Honestly, I don't see why any good-faith person in their right mind would add the info that you did. Is approval rating data really relevant to the MSM and Trump? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:54, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
|}
+
:::I am willing to discuss these three issues with you, but the place for that is on the essay talk page or my talk page. Thank you. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 18:23, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Your edits are ridiculous. You think that a TIME magazine cover and approval rating data are somehow important to the article. They give the article a left-of-center tilt. Also, I have tried discussing things with you. '''I did it all the time with you, and I was actually better at going to the talk pages than you.''' However, many discussions with you (and other editors and you) show that you are unwilling to budge, to reconsider, or to meet in the middle. I have accepted many of your edits, even as I reverted some others (and I am referring to changes in single diffs and articles). Knowing your personality and the contents of your edits, I see no good reason to start an (almost literally) endless discussion with you that wastes over half the time I have to made any edits on CP whatsoever. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:36, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
  
 +
Ignoring all the main argument, I also see two other factors.  First, this is an "essay," which usually means conflicting points of view can be published. Second, to make this article, JDano copied the work of others into an essay which would presumably have been written solely by him.  --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 19:47, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:I think that the headnote makes that clear, but I will add a statement to the talk page giving attribution. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:52, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
  
2. When you visit the verse's page, you get more information:
+
::We do not delete essays, no matter how much we disagree with them, unless they are libelous. That's been the rule here for as long as I can remember.  The point of an essay is that one can express one's personal point of view, not subject to being reverted or otherwise hounded.  The essay category is full of such things.
  [[CBP:John 20:2]]
+
::But I would recommend that JDano request that its name be changed from just the name of another article with "Essay:" in front of it. If I wanted to write yet another essay on the same topic I'd have a difficult time.  That's why I named my recently created essay "[[Essay:Pussy Riot - an Anti-Putin Perspective]]".  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 20:00, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
leads to
+
:::In addition to the name of the essay, my problem with his essay is that he attacks me with false claims. I already mentioned this above, but at the top of his essay, JDano writes "''Until August 2017, a group of editors worked hard to develop an encyclopedia article on this topic, but then one editor decided unilaterally to delete materials that did not agree with his personal opinions.''" '''That statement is bogus -- most of the article is MY WORK, and I edited the article long before August 2017. JDano is blatantly violating Conservapedia Commandment #1, the same commandment he claims to support.''' --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:54, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
{|class="wikitable"
+
::::Also, as I said quite a lot today, the reason why I removed the info was that they were terrible edits. '''They inserted liberal bias because they focused on irrelevant topics such as approval rating polls and TIME magazine covers (along with blindly accepting the MSM's narrative on the Pheonix rally and Charlottesville) '''rather than focusing on the actual topic.''' --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:58, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
| style="background: silver"|
+
:::::I am addressing this concerns on the essay talk page where it belongs.  1990sguy has been misusing this page. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 22:48, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
[[CBP:John 20:1|<<]] [[CBP:John 20:2|<sup>2</sup>]]She ran and came to Simon Peter, and to the other student, whom Jesus loved, and told them, "They have taken away the Lord out of the tomb, and we don't know where they have laid Him!" [[CBP:John 20:1|>>]]
+
::::::As an encyclopedia, it would inappropriate to criticize other editors, either individually or as a group, in an entry or essay.  On a talk page that would be fine, but not in an entry.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:53, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::I don't think that is what prompted 1990sguy to start this section and request the deletion, but I will reword the headnote.  You should be aware that the encyclopedia article was a collaborative effort until 1990sguy started to block users with whom he had disagreements in late August 2017. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 08:04, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Andy, would you please rename the essay so it is not just the actual article's name with the word "essay"? What about [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump - JDano's perspective]]? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:41, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::I would recommend a name that doesn't have JDano's name on it.  After all, my "[[Essay:Pussy Riot - an Anti-Putin Perspective]]" article doesn't have my name on it.  Perhaps use the phrase "an alternative perspective", or "a non-conservative-media perspective", or "a contrarian perspective".  I could think of a few edgier names too, but we don't want to get ''too'' inflammatory.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 12:05, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Andy, would you please make on of these page moves? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:25, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::It appears that 1990sguy is continuing to pick fights.  First, I want to make clear that other editors are welcomed to continue '''adding''' material to [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]], and that the essay represents more than just my personal opinions.  It also appears that User:1990sguy has a very unencyclopedic view of [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] -- rather than explain the difficult relationship between the two, he wants just a list of times that the mainstream media has show bias against or disapproval of Donald Trump or his actions.  I don't think that his vision for the article fits with our policy of "Tolerance of opposing ideas means that we're not afraid of describing ideas we don't believe in. If you'll follow our editorial guidelines, then there's no idea off limits. Just write an article which explains what the idea is, who believes in it, and the reasons they give for it."  Therefore, I propose a compromise:
 +
:::::::::* move [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] to [[Examples of mainstream media bias against Donald Trump]] then
 +
:::::::::* move [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] to [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]]
 +
:::::::::This will allow 1990sguy to have a clear label for the list he wants to currate and will allow all interested editors to add content regarding an important topic -- the relationship of Donald Trump and the mainstream media.  Many thanks! [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 17:57, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::That's not a good "compromise." It's just a way to get your version in the mainspace, and following your suggestion will create two articles with mostly duplicate information. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Mainstream_media_and_Donald_Trump&diff=1369928&oldid=1369923 These are the changes that JDano wants to incorporate into the article]. Apparently, he thinks it's necessary to discuss negative approval rating data in this article, for example. Andy, please judge those edits for yourself, and please most JDano's essay to a more appropriate name, as I and SamHB said above (and if I and SamHB both agree on something, it shows it's noncontroversial change). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:45, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::Actually, 1990'sguy and me agreeing on something is not all that noteworthy.  We would disagree strongly on issues of creationism, for example, if we were ever to get in a conflict over it, but we don't.  And his attitude toward Breitbart news seems to me to be appalling, but I haven't looked into the issues enough to want to get involved with that.  But these issues of ''content'' are, in my opinion, trivial.  His positions don't bother me at all.  I think we might be able get along just fine.
 +
:::::::::::We also disagree on one matter of policy&mdash;whether he should have absolute power to block me any time he wants.  But Andy has decided that issue in his favor, so there's nothing I can do about it.  In fact, I stopped editing CP for a week when I decided it was no longer safe for me to be here.  But JDano came back and survived, so maybe 1990'sguy intends not to exercise arbitrary and absolute power, which I think is a good sign.
  
'''Other Translations'''
+
:::::::::::But there are several issues of policy that 1990'sguy and I seem to agree on, based on what he said about creating an "essay" page for JDano's writing about MSM and DT:
 +
:::::::::::*Non-libelous material is never removed from any talk pages, user pages or otherwise, nor are such pages ever deleted.
 +
:::::::::::*Non-libelous material is never removed from any user pages, nor are such pages ever deleted.
 +
:::::::::::*Essays are never subject to edit-warring.  As much as one may disagree with the content of an essay, it's an essay.  One can complain on the talk page, but, ultimately, the author(s) control the content.
 +
:::::::::::Now I think it's unseemly for the content of the MSM+DT main page and JDano's essay to involve complaints about the writing quality of the other.  By the way, I'm not going to get involved in that issue.  I would need to study both pages in detail, which I don't have time for, and, in any case, it's outside of my area of expertise.  However much 1990'sguy and JDano may despise each other's writing, they should each concentrate on making their own article the best it can be.  And refrain from attacking each other.  Except possibly in talk pages, if you must.
 +
:::::::::::One thing JDano should do is pick an appropriate title for his essay, that appropriately describes its role as a "reply" or "rebuttal" to the main article.  Then the essay can be restored and set to that name.  Moving pages is a difficult operation, so it would be good to have to move it only once.
 +
:::::::::::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 21:22, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::(edit conflict) The problem is that if a topic is an encyclopedia article - it must be written in an encyclopedic tone explaining all sides.  We are trying to write an encyclopedia article and you keep taking out relevant material claiming that it is not pro-Trump.  The relationship between the President and the media is a very important topic.  If a reader looks at both he will come away with a better understanding from [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] than from the bias fragments that have been slapped together in [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]], so I do not agree with your proposal to rename and I think that my suggested renaming is a better fit to Conservapedia's policies.  If the essay is renamed, I will delete the italic headnote.  Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:08, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::Passing off what the MSM says as fact does not give a reader a better understanding on this topic. Nor does including polling data. I notice that, for some reason, all the information that you add related to Trump is negative -- '''please show me a diff where you added information that portrayed Trump in a positive light;''' I found quite a lot of the opposite as I showed with the diffs I linked here and elsewhere. This article accurately shows the relationship between Trump and the media as it is, and let me remind you that we are a conservative encyclopedia -- we don't blindly accept the MSM's narrative of various topics as you did. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:06, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::::(edit conflict) I agree that we should not pass off what the MSM says as fact, but we can cite to the MSM coverage when a critic claims that the MSM failed to cover something.  We should discuss this on the essay talk page, and not change the subject again. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::By the way, the relationship between the MSM and Trump is that the former strongly opposes the latter. Trump is not criticizing the MSM because he really wants to -- he's doing it in response to their bias against him. Trump is a New Yorker who once was a more liberal Democrat. If he's now the MSM's #1 opponent, that says something about their reporting.
 +
:::::::::::JDano's favored article unduly favors the MSM's reporting. The diff I linked above shows this, along with [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Mainstream_media_and_Donald_Trump&diff=1371779&oldid=1371761 this edit], where he delegitimizes the conservative media's critique of the MSM. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:54, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::You are free to raise these concerns on the essay's talk page, this is not the proper place.  The phrase "conservative media" is hard to define.  Some of it like Fox News is mainstream media.  If you want to start a [[Conservative media and Donald Trump]] article, we can discuss that complicated relationship as well.  We are not here to legitimate or condemn anyone.  We just make the article follow the sources without exaggeeration. That is true whether the source agrees with the CP editor or not. Where in the current [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] do you explain how Trump's strategy has brought things to the current state and whether his media strategy is successful? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 19:08, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::::::First off, as my previous experiences discussing with you proved worthless as you would consistently refuse to budge, I don't have much interest discussing with you -- '''it will just lead to an endless discussion'''. In the past, '''I was actually more consistent in going to the talk page than you were''' -- look at the talk pages, including your own. Remember the "female genital mutilation" dispute? It only ended after you were blocked, and you accused me ridiculous and terrible things just because I took the same position that every other editor eventually took along with me. Also, I didn't come here to discuss with you -- I came here to ask Andy to take care of your essay, '''in which you personally attacked me and made blatantly false claims.''' --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:06, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::::::::(edit conflict) There are established procedures for proposing a page move that allow other people to comment on it.  It is done on the essay talk page.  There are procedures to discuss content concerns. Again, go to the essay talk page. If you disagree with an editor, you should try to work things out. From the last comment above, you appear to be emotionally involved and upset, so you should not block people with whom you have such feelings. Being a good Christian neighbor, I thought that by creating two different pages, I am trying to avoid future conflicts.  Yet, by repeatedly running to Andy's talk page, you are trying to engender and escalate differences. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
JDano, if you want the keep [[Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] from being deleted, you are going to have to make it 80% different from [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] in terms of its wording, content and pictures. You have 4 weeks to do this or it will be deleted.
  
[[KJV]]: <span style="color:red">Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.</span>
+
19990sguy,  I would focus now on either making the article better or making related articles such as [[Donald Trump and Fox News]] or [[Donald Trump and CNN]] or [[Donald Trump and conservative news media]] or [[Donald Trump and Breitbart]] or [[Donald Trump and Jim Acosta]] or [[Donald Trump and Twitter]].  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:24, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:I believe that there is now an 80% difference between the two pages.  I have been working on it all day.  I no longer am able to upload pictures. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::I have access to a tool which says your essay is "78% percentage similar to" the other page. So you are not even close to doing a proper revision according to this tool (and no I am going to share with you more information about this tool. I will share this tool with 1990sguy though so he can evaluate your efforts in an objective way). Please use different sources, wording and pictures. Website visitors don't very similar content and that is why your essay will be deleted unless you do a very substantial revision. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 20:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::The whole idea is to take the same sources and put them into context.  Please read both right now.  You can judge as to which version treats the sources fairly.  To my knowledge, there has never been a requirement that essays and articles use different pictures or sources.  I want other editors (including 1990sguy) to feel free to contribute additional points to the essay or to both the essay and the article (and they should not have to worry about how different their contribution makes the two).  May I suggest that you move the Essay back until we can decide what is the best way forward?  Many thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 22:32, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::I think Conservative's idea is good. You added information that I think is bad to add to a mainspace article on this topic, so you can keep that in your essay. However, the articles should be different, and an essay is not to supplement -- not replace -- mainspace articles. Until that is achieved, it is appropriate for the essay to be a sub-page of your account. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:37, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
JDano, in the past, I wasted time trying to reason with you on talk pages. I am not going to do that anymore. I deleted your essay.  
  
'''Comments'''
+
I did have a confidential talk with 1990sguy about things he could do to improve as an editor. But no matter what improvements he makes, I think that ultimately he will have trouble with you if you persist in pushing an anti-Trump agenda in areas where Trump is being reasonable. Trump is obviously not infallible though and all presidents make mistakes.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 23:59, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:P.S. This wiki isn't ModerateRepublicanpedia.com nor is it NeverTrumppedia.com [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:12, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
  
'''Context: John 20'''
+
::I don't view this as anything to do with Trump.  I think it has to do with a failure to read the sources and to present the sources in a balanced way.  I don't care whether the underlying fact makes Trump look bad or good, everyone must avoid stretching sources to support what we hope they say rather than what they actually say.  I am a conservative first and foremost, but I am also a dedicated encyclopedia writer.  I was active here before Trump rose to his leadership position, and I plan to be here after he is gone.  In some cases, I pick a topic and write an article, in other cases like the TAR cleanup effort, you ask me to do the work.  Cons, you properly decided the Conservapedia should have a [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] article (rather than [[Mainstream media's war on Trump]]), and I tried to fill out topic based upon how the sources informed me.  I had hoped that creating a separate essay would end the problem, but 1990sguy loves to run here to stir up unnecessary drama.  If Andy wants to preserve the right of editors to write essays, he knows where this essay is located (as a deleted user subpage). Many thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:20, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Readers don't want substantially duplicate content from other websites posted at Conservapedia nor do they want substantially duplicate articles at Conservapedia. I have zero regrets about deleting that essay. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 00:36, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::I agree that Conservapedia does not need two articles, but what is there now is a mess with no flow and footnotes that do not support the text.  The article says that the Mainstream media failed to report this or that, and yet there are plenty of MSM sources showing the coverage.  Cons, as a skilled researcher, perhaps you could clean it up. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 00:51, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::An opportunity opened up for me to pursue. I am not going to investigate your claims and I doubt anyone else will either. One or more of your past edit comments and other matters has created a situation where you have few allies. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 02:58, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::It is not a question of allies.  It is a question of Conservapedia's standards and reliability.  I can understand if two people have a sincere difference of opinion (for example Editor A supports Trump for the Republican nomination and Editor B supports Ted Cruz).  Both editors should respect each others views, but make sure that articles are not slanted for one candidate or the other.  I also understand a live and let live attitude toward people curating lists, like [[Donald Trump achievements]] if there is clear criteria for what belongs on that list.  I don't understand how a topic sentence like "The relationship between the '''Mainstream media and Donald Trump''' has been problematic." has drawn so much ire and edit warring.  I challenge anyone here to write a better sentence that uses the phrase '''Mainstream media and Donald Trump''' that is encyclopedic and accurate and to put it in as the first sentence of the article.  We all agree on the facts (that there is bad chemistry between President Trump and the media), we can't agree on how to apply Conservapedia's standards to produce an article.  Further, with Cons' unfortunate action late last night, we no longer agree that editors can write essays or have subpages on their user page. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 08:29, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Your edits in this case (like so many others) were bad. Yes, they did give the article a left-of-center (or RINO) tilt, and they relied exclusively on the MSM, but in this case, they also were irrelevant to the article. Polling numbers in response to the Charlottesville incident are irrelevant to Trump and the media. It is true that sometimes you catch errors in things I write (I have made this '''very''' clear in my previous comments, and I often change '''a lot''' of my info due to your criticisms). However, you always do more than catch errors -- you insert biased information as well. I revert the bias while keeping the improvements, but you want it to be all or nothing (for all the articles, D.T. achievements, fake news, travel ban, constitutional carry, etc.). I have no regrets that your essay was deleted -- you were given the chance to make it different from the mainspace article, and you still protested anyway. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:46, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Dear 1990sguy, you have the chronology wrong.  The essay was '''deleted''' and moved to a user subpage '''after''' I spent all day making it different from the article and '''before''' I was offered 4 weeks to make it further different.  Some people have expressed doubt about this "objective tool" which measures the differences between pages.  Could you please shed some light on what is it and what criteria that it applies?  Many thanks! [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 09:22, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::::Conservative moved the essay after checking your article and finding that it was still 78% the same, as the talk page comments attest. Seeing your edits to the essay before it was deleted, this is a reasonable number, as there were many sections that you didn't even touch. I will not reveal something that he does not want me to reveal, but I will assure that it is real and accurate and that I would use it honestly and objectively if given the chance. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:33, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
I restored [[User:JDano/Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]]. 
  
{{:CBP:John 20:1}} <span style="color:blue">{{:CBP:John 20:2}}</span> {{:CBP:John 20:3}} {{:CBP:John 20:4}} {{:CBP:John 20:5}} {{:CBP:John 20:6}} {{:CBP:John 20:7}} {{:CBP:John 20:8}} {{:CBP:John 20:9}} {{:CBP:John 20:10}} {{:CBP:John 20:11}} {{:CBP:John 20:12}} {{:CBP:John 20:13}} {{:CBP:John 20:14}} {{:CBP:John 20:15}} {{:CBP:John 20:16}} {{:CBP:John 20:17}} {{:CBP:John 20:18}} {{:CBP:John 20:19}} {{:CBP:John 20:20}} {{:CBP:John 20:21}} {{:CBP:John 20:22}} {{:CBP:John 20:23}}{{:CBP:John 20:24}} {{:CBP:John 20:25}} {{:CBP:John 20:26}} {{:CBP:John 20:27}} {{:CBP:John 20:28}} {{:CBP:John 20:29}} {{:CBP:John 20:30}} {{:CBP:John 20:31}}
+
But I am absolutely not going to wrangle with you about the necessity of you making the essay 80% different from the aforementioned article.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 21:45, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
|}
+
:Conservative, why did you restore the essay? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:47, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Cons, many thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 21:59, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Conservative, '''''why''''' did you restore it? Does the criteria to make it 80% different still apply? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:16, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::I think it's pretty obvious.  He had made an ill-considered decision to delete something, in violation of Conservapedia customs, and he reconsidered.  People rethink their decisions, and correct bad decisions, all the time.  Cons has done this before&mdash;he once deleted my user and talk pages.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 15:13, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
It is in his userspace. If he doesn't make it 80% different in 30 days, it will be deleted. I restored it to give him a chance at making it 80% different.  He is going to have radically change the text,
 +
sources/footnoting and pictures for him to make it under the 80% different threshold for his essay.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 22:40, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Thank you. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:40, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Again, this discussion does not belong on this page.  1990sguy, why do you conduct all of your communications here instead of relevant talk pages? [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 10:56, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Why are you doing nothing to move the discussion somewhere else? You are posting here, SamHB is posting here, Conservative is posting here (and I just replied to Conservative's comment that he restored the essay), but you only focus on me. If your behavior persists, I may have to take action against you again. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 11:11, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Because the page where it naturally belongs was, for a while, deleted.  People need to know that the pages on which they are discussing things won't suddenly disappear.  I feel sorry for Andy having to have this on his personal talk page, but, until this issue gets straightened out, it needs to be here.
 +
::::@1990's guy: Your last sentence above sounds like a threat.  Contributors to web sites that are trying to appear professional, and that have "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia" in their masthead, shouldn't do that.
 +
::::@JDano: It's obvious that things you have written in your essay anger 1990'sguy a great deal.  While he needs to deal with his anger, please do what you can to keep your essay from saying things that would anger reasonable people.
 +
::::@1990's guy: Many things here at CP anger me greatly: the Conservative Bible Project, the Counterexamples to Relativity, the Counterexamples to an Old Earth, the Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge page, to name just a few.  We have to deal with those things.  We respect diverse opinions, as a wiki like this should.  But I agree that personal attacks should not be present in any pages anywhere.
 +
::::@Cons: If you really think that some kind of objective technical "tool" to compare pages would be a useful thing, why don't you send it to all of us?  You know my email, of course.  There are actually a few things I would like to analyze objectively with such a tool.
 +
::::@Cons: To show your patience, why don't you increase the 30 day limit to 66 days?  With the added detail that they must be 66 consecutive days that you keep your promise not to edit Conservapedia, as described at the bottom of my [[User_talk:SamHB|talk page]]?  The clock starts now, or, more precisely, at 10:49, 7 September.
 +
::::[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 15:13, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::Of course there are things I don't like, but I wish JDano would act in a manner similar to you or DavidB4. He should know by now that his POV is not conservative (or, if you insist, like [[Conservative|the conservatism supported by CP]], a conservative encyclopedia) and would accordingly be more cautious in his edits. However, he continues making sneaky edits (making canned edit summaries that don't say what he is actually doing) inserting liberal bias and/or favoring the MSM over the conservative media, like on the Barack Obama article,[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&diff=1298204&oldid=1298189][http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Barack_Hussein_Obama&diff=1296241&oldid=1296193] Constitutional Carry (calling it a "propaganda term", etc.), D.T. achievements, fake news (taking away blame of the MSM), gun control, etc. He then gets into edit fights over the content (before I started coming here, I was actually better than him at going to either his talk page or the article talk page, and sometimes he would not respond to my comments). Sometimes, he makes ridiculous personal attacks[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JDano&diff=1357464&oldid=1357362] ([http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:JDano&diff=1353894&oldid=1353892 apparently, thinking that FGM is a predominantly Muslim practice either makes you a parodist or someone trying to legalize the practice] -- [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Community_Portal&oldid=1369911#JDano CP's other editors disagree]). If you want to know why I'm angry at JDano, I hope this helps. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:01, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
SamHB, I will follow your suggestions regarding the 66 days. JDano has 66 days now.
 +
:Please remember that the 66 day period is a period during which you do not edit Conservapedia.  The clock starts when you stop.  As of now, that means that the clock started at 08:42 on 9 September.
 +
:After today, I am going to refrain from writing anything that will tempt Cons to edit here.  Further communication will be by email, where we can discuss things freely, without either of us being tempted to engage in "grandstanding".  But first, I need you to send me the "objective comparison tool" that you referred to above, and for which you provided a screen shot below.  So please bear with me for a little bit longer while I argue with you publicly, below.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
  
This is done via the <nowiki><noinclude></nowiki> tag, which transcludes only the actual translated verse. In this way many other features can be added without tempering with quotations. The links on the pages allow for navigating through the project, the context section is an invitation to read further on - John 20:10-31 is missing at the moment...
+
Second, [https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10940/europe-islamic-future THIS ARTICLE] convinced me that Europe very stubborn and very much engaging in denialism as far as Islam. If this continues, within 2-4 generations Islamic/evangelical creationism could easily kill off evolutionism in Britain, France and Germany. In 4-6 generations, creationists could kill off evolutionism in Europe. On top of this, evangelical Christianity is growing by leaps and bounds in China. You know you can't satisfactorily answer the [https://creation.com/15-questions-for-evolutionists 15 questions for evolutionists].  Its time you stop clinging to your lost causes of evolutionism and old earthism. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
 +
::Ummmm, I was puzzled at first that you were inserting material about evangelical creationism right here in the middle of the dispute between 1990'sguy and Jdano over an essay relating to Donald Trump.  But then I realized that it was another swipe at me and my acceptance of evolution, bizarrely placed in the middle of this discussion.  With a reference to a "15 questions" item on a creationist web site.
 +
::Cons, we've been through this many many times before.  I do not accept articles from creationist/fundamentalist religious sources as being authoritative about scientific discussions.  But I figured I'd humor you and at least look at the page this one time. The page says, right at the top, that "The General Theory of Evolution, as acknowledged by prominent evolutionists, includes the origin of life."  No, that is not true. Prominent scientists (or even those that are not prominent) do not acknowledge any such idea.  I stopped reading right there.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
  
At the moment, the only disadvantage of the representation is that it takes a lot of work to implement the CBP this way. And I'm afraid that [[User:Edbot]] won't be much of a help...
+
:1990sguy, JDano is liberal on some issues.  Liberals always double down. People who are liberal on certain issues often double down on those issues. Sooner or later you are going to have to block JDano for longer and longer periods. He is not going to change otherwise. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 17:10, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Dear Cons, I am conservative on most issues, and libertarian on others. The reason why you do not understand my personal political opinions is that I take my work at Conservapedia very seriously as an obligation to the high-school level readers that we are trying to serve. Conservapedia commandment #5 is "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry." So I do not, and I also delete it when I see that others have posted opinions -- whether I agree or disagree with it. Let's move this discussion to the proper talk page please. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 17:49, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Whether you're conservative or not, your edits strongly suggest otherwise. Also, if you're going to accuse me of posting personal opinion, I cite everything, oftentimes with multiple references -- it's not my personal opinion. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:51, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
  
As the New Testaments incorporates ca. 8000 verses, at least for the Gospels such a task could be done manually.
+
:I don't know where you get the idea that there are skeptics about the existence of this tool, or the idea that it is mysterious. The only mystery is why you haven't mailed it, or a download URL, to me.  Now it's true that JDano wrote, above, that "Some people have expressed doubt about this "objective tool" which measures the differences between pages."  I don't know who he thinks those "some people" are.  I haven't seen any doubt expressed anywhere at Conservapedia.
 +
:As I'm sure you know, comparing files is tricky.  The theoretical research ("Hamming distance", for example) is useless here.  Textual comparison tools are an important part of software Integrated Development Environments (IDE's), or even environments that aren't integrated, as in the Emacs "three-way-merge" operation.  The wikimedia software that is used to compare versions of files in the file history here at CP (which is how we got into this fight in the first place) is surprisingly quirky, even though the problem it is trying to solve is much easier.  As an example, compare the 10:38, 9 September 2017 and 10:44, 9 September 2017 versions of the [[Equifax]] article.  Did it really consider the files to be different in just 5 pairs of wikilink brackets, or in 4 pairs plus a complete paragraph?  It makes a big difference&mdash;that paragraph is the bulk of the article.
 +
:So I'd really like to get this tool and try it out on various files, both here at CP and elsewhere.  I might even add it to my set of software development utilities.  So please send it to me by email.  Then I will stop tempting you to get involved in this discussion and thereby breaking your promise.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:OK, I found it.  Google the quoted phrase "secret magic tool to measure the degree to which articles are different", and you will see an expression of skepticism about the existence of this tool, apparently expressed 3 days ago.  On everyone's favorite web site.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 13:12, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
  
[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:38, 19 July 2011 (EDT)
+
JDano, if you want the keep [[User:JDano/Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump]] from being deleted and have it be made into an essay, you are going to have to make it 80% different from [[Mainstream media and Donald Trump]]. I suggests making changes in terms of its wording, footnotes/sources and pictures.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 04:38, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
  
BTW: ''tempus fugit'' a quarter of a year ago I made some comments on the translation of ἰδοὺ. Two months ago, you announced that you were preparing an answer to these. Any progress? [[User:AugustO|AugustO]]
+
== IP blocking for "servers allowing spam" ==
  
: I did eventually respond somewhere, by noting that ἰδοὺ has long been translated as "when", which is archaic for "at that moment."
+
Hi,<br />
 +
I have some lists of "servers allowing spam" (I'll refrain from using the proper name for these servers for the sake of those who may not know) from some other off-site administration duties.  I see some other Admins and Assistant SysOps have been blocking such IPs, but I wasn't sure if as an assistant SysOp, I have the authority to do that. Would you like me to implement such blocks, or shall I refrain, or perhaps just send you the lists for you to check before blocking?  Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 21:04, 22 August 2017 (EDT)
  
: Your namespace suggestion is fascinating, and I wonder if both approaches could be used:  continue with CBP where it is, but create a new namespace (perhaps with links and templates) that provide the additional functionality you suggest.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:29, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:Perhaps it would be best if you sent me the list first.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:16, 22 August 2017 (EDT)
  
::''Your namespace suggestion is fascinating, and I wonder if both approaches could be used: continue with CBP where it is, but create a new namespace (perhaps with links and templates) that provide the additional functionality you suggest'' This is indeed possible - and should be the way to go: the new namespace would include only the verses, nothing else is changed for the CBP: no pages are moved, only new pages are created.
+
::Okay, I'll need to sort it first, but will try to send you some of them soon.  At this point what I have is "dirty data" so maybe I will clean up some of them (a "sample") and send those, and if you want more afterwards, I'll keep going.  Cheers! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 23:22, 22 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::I've sent a partial list.  I'll put a hold on further extraction pending you reply. I literally have hundreds, and probably thousands, most of which do not seem to be blocked on CP. However, for better or worse there are no IP ranges, only specific addresses. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:19, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
  
::''I did eventually respond somewhere, by noting that ἰδοὺ has long been translated as "when", which is archaic for "at that moment." '' You seem to refer to [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?&title=Talk%3ABiblical_scientific_foreknowledge&action=historysubmit&diff=888062&oldid=888055 this entry] from July 10, 2011:
+
::::Do you happen to know if any specific countries' addresses are used against us more than others?
::::''August, I recall your request for me to look for any reference translating ἰδού  as "at that moment."  With one simple search, I found that it is translated as "when" [http://www.studylight.org/lex/grk/view.cgi?number=2400], which is archaic for "at that time" in today's vernacular.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:43, 10 July 2011 (EDT)''
+
::::As I'm sure you have seen, I have started blocking the addresses I have. This really is just the tip of the iceberg, though--I have many thousands more. I feel funny blocking so many, but most are overseas anyway, so I suppose there is no harm. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:13, 24 August 2017 (EDT)
::Surely this isn't the ''[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?&title=Talk%3ABiblical_scientific_foreknowledge&action=historysubmit&diff=868549&oldid=868528 review and comment]'' which you were planning for two months?
+
::::''I plan to review and comment on your extensive edits about the "at that moment" issue. [...] --[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 12:55, 13 May 2011 (EDT)''
+
::Though it doesn't address the issues I detailed [[Talk:John_1-7_(Translated)#Issue_with_translation_of_John_4:53|here]], I will take a closer look at your statement:
+
::'''''August, I recall your request for me to look for any reference translating ἰδού  as "at that moment." ''''' It pains me that I have to stress this: I don't ask you for '''any''' reference, but for a '''meaningful''' reference! The first attempt to come up with such a reference was your [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:John_1-7_(Translated)&diff=next&oldid=862247 google count] of ἰδού and "at that moment". I think I showed how such an argument is flawed in general, and especially in this case - as the top hits of your google don't corroborate your view. As I said on [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?&title=Talk%3AJohn_1-7_%28Translated%29&action=historysubmit&diff=862369&oldid=862252 April 18, 2011]:
+
::::''Aschlafy, I understand that you have not much time at hand. But it should have been obvious from the beginning that an appeal to a google ranking has no place in a serious project like this translation. To make me stating the obvious ([[Talk:Matthew_20-28_(Translated)#ἰδού|here]] is bad enough. Getting me to make it ''blatantly'' obvious (as I have done above) is a waste of my time. Please remember that an argument is not only about ''participation'', but about ''contribution''!  --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:53, 18 April 2011 (EDT)
+
::Frankly, I expected your ''comment and review'' to answer to these problems with your google-based approach, too.
+
::Unfortunately, the new comment doesn't include a '''meaningful''' reference, neither.
+
::'''''With one simple search...''''' this should have been a warning: you have tried ''simple searches'' before, and you failed.
+
::'''''...I found that it is translated as "when"...''''' Indeed, your source shows that ἰδού is translated once (out of 165 occurrences) as ''when'' by the NAS, the [[New American Standard Bible]]. Conservapedia states
+
::::''The New American Standard Bible (NASB) is a modern English language translation of the Bible. It is fully accessible online.
+
::::''It is based on the 1901 American Standard Version, but seeks to provide a smoother reading in contemporary English. Archaic English "thee's" and "thou's" are replaced and words and phrases have been updated to the extent that their familiar meanings have changed. Sentences beginning with "and" have been changed, sometimes substituting "then" or "but" depending on the context. Through consultation with original Hebrew and Greek texts, some passages have been corrected.
+
  
::'''''...which is archaic for "at that time" in today's vernacular.''''' Yep, ''when'' can be archaic for "at that time", but it is definitely not used this way in the NASB, as the NASB avoids archaic expressions - as you can see in the section above. And "at that time" isn't the same as "at that moment"
+
:::::You're doing great work. As to which countries, China and Singapore might be a bit worse than most. But that's just a guess.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:47, 24 August 2017 (EDT)
  
::'''Summary: ''' On March 24, 2011 you claimed that there is a ''[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?&title=Matthew_20-28_%28Translated%29&action=historysubmit&diff=858739&oldid=757784 nuance of the Greek ἰδού that means "at that moment"]''. Ever since then you have failed to back up this claim using a credible source. So four months later the only justification to translate ἰδού as "at that moment" is still that it suits you.
+
::::::Thank you!  I may pay a little more attention to those locations then, but if you don't know of any specific trends, I won't make a special effort to focus on any.  It sounds like you don't mind, so I'll keep going.  Do I assume correctly there is no method here to block multiple addresses at once?  I'm starting to figure out the scope of how long processing all of these addresses will be. I just "scraped" addresses from one service alone, and got about 49,000 addresses in all. I can't deal with that kind of quantity manually, even if I do run out of addresses of my own.  If not, that's okay--I'll just do some of what I have, and stop with that. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:27, 25 August 2017 (EDT)
  
::::Μαρτυρῶ ἐγὼ παντὶ τῷ ἀκούοντι τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου· ἐάν τις ἐπιθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτά, ἐπιθήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς πληγὰς τὰς γεγραμμένας ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ, Μαρτυρῶ ἐγὼ παντὶ τῷ ἀκούοντι τοὺς λόγους τῆς προφητείας τοῦ βιβλίου τούτου· ἐάν τις ἐπιθῇ ἐπ’ αὐτά, ἐπιθήσει ὁ θεὸς ἐπ’ αὐτὸν τὰς πληγὰς τὰς γεγραμμένας ἐν τῷ βιβλίῳ τούτῳ, Λέγει ὁ μαρτυρῶν ταῦτα, Ναί, ἔρχομαι ταχύ. Ἀμήν, ἔρχου κύριε Ἰησοῦ.
+
:::::::That's great, David. Thank you!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:26, 25 August 2017 (EDT)
  
::[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 09:05, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
== Explicit rescinding of longstanding policy ==
  
== New mystery ==
+
::''The material that is being discussed here is archived and available in [http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Aschlafly/Archive61#Dispute_resolution_request this section] and the sections that follow.''
  
[[Mystery: Which country will make a greater move towards strong conservatism in the coming 10 years: England or the United States?]] [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
+
That policy is, of course, that "assistant sysops" ''are not permitted'' to block users over content disputes, only for obvious vandalism.  I have brought this up a number of times; I won't repeat it here.
:Wouldn't that question be more suited to a debate? After all, what is so mysterious about it, the way you've phrased it? Can things that have yet happen even be mysterious? [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 09:33, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Deleted it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:25, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== [[User:Mamajasia928]] ==
+
Andy has '''explicitly, on four occasions, given 1990'sguy permission to block people over content.'''  And 1990's guy has [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AJDano wielded that power twice].
 +
*First [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361077&oldid=1361037 here].
 +
::1990'sguy [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361078&oldid=1361077 seemed reluctant to do this], since JDano also (at that time) had blocking authority.  As though he will only take action against weaker parties.
 +
::I called him out on that [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361190&oldid=1361188 here].
 +
*A second time [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361229&oldid=1361200 here].
 +
*A third time [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361282&oldid=1361269 here].
 +
::I objected [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1361580&oldid=1361355 here].
 +
*Andy threatens a block over content, but does not delegate that authority to 1990'sguy [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1368151&oldid=1368104 here].
 +
*1990'sguy acknowledges his power [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1368156&oldid=1368151 here].
 +
*A fourth time [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=1368158&oldid=1368156 here].
 +
And then 1990's guy suddenly [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAschlafly&diff=1368201&oldid=1368158 wants to archive the whole thing, putting it out of sight].  Which Andy did.  This strikes me as suspicious.
  
A spambot that needs to be blocked and pages deleted.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:14, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
This policy makes it impossible for me to work here. Another assistant has already improperly wielded block authority against me because of my contention, in the [[Pussy Riot]] article, that one does not need to be an "elitist" or "leftist" to oppose murderous thug Vladimir Putin.
  
== Hello ==
+
[[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 01:08, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
  
I found your site over a year ago, but I just made an account. I saw that you are teaching a World History course this fall. How and where could I sign up for this class? I'd love to take it!
+
:Once again, SamHB, you conveniently ignore that you were blocked for attempting to impose a liberal POV on that article and for edit warring (both in violation of Conservapedia policy) and for trying to provoke fights, as you're doing even now with your thinly-veiled shot at me. You brought that, and your other previous blocks, down on yourself through your history of behavior here, and trying to claim "improper" use of block authority to excuse and dismiss your behavior here does not make your case.  Follow the rules of the site instead of fighting them (and those who actually follow them) and you'll be a lot better off for it. [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 02:29, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
  
Thanks,  
+
::SamHB, there is nothing "suspicious" about me wanting to archive everything -- '''the talk page had nearly 300,000 bytes, and it took very long to scroll down to the bottom. ''Also,''''' I did not specify which discussions to archive -- I would not have argued if Andy kept the disputes with JDano (but now their archived, so you're just duplicating the discussions by re-adding them here, Sam).
<br>Darius Bieber
+
<br>
+
July 20th, 2011
+
  
==[[Andromeda galaxy]]==
+
::Sam, JDano's editing style is the one that makes it impossible to work here, not to mention the fact that many of his edits have inserted left-of-center POV (such as calling constitutional carry a "propaganda term", etc.). I have been extremely reluctant to use any blocking authority on him regardless -- SamHB, if there were misconduct on my part, it wouldn't be because I am acting the way I do now. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:31, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
I know this has been contentious issue, and I've studied most of the background discussions on the talk page there. I believe I understand the point you made, ''[http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Andromeda_galaxy&diff=prev&oldid=753423  It's absurd even to contemplate whether the universe would exist so far into the future]'', and I fully agree it is junk science designed to serve a socio-political cause. The editor, User:BMcP remains in good standing (as best I can determine), and has asked to restore some of his efforts on tthe page. I was thinking of possibly [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=Andromeda+galaxy&timestamp=20100211040546&diff=prev this version]. I have not fully reviewed the article, and don't feel competent to judge competing claims on technical data (if competing claims on technical data do indeed exist on that page).
+
  
The origninal editor may wish to return to CP. I understand fully, and could not agree more, constant repetition of claims, such as "millions and billions of years", may be considered more as a form of indoctrination masquarading as science, as it is both factually unverified, and unveriable. Do you have any objections to the reversion or the editors return?  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:36, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::(edit conflict) The problem is that our rules about blocking cannot depend on whether the content is thought to be liberal or conservativeAll an angry person with blocking authority needs to do is to define "conservative" as content I prefer and "liberal" as content the other person prefers.  If two people have an editing dispute, they should try to work it outIf one or both of the people have blocking authority, they should not use it because they are too emotionally involvedIn the long term, we need to build a colleagial working environment, and blocking the person with whom you disagree destroys that environment. Thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 09:29, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
:Just as an aside, I reverted the edits by FergusE (whom I suspect to be a parodist) because he removed the distances section. Even creationists agree on how far away things are. hence needing to find a solution for the starlight problem. Whether or not there are billions of years in our future is a different argument altogether. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:40, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::Billions of solar years, I presume you refer to.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:49, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::What I mean is that Andromeda is billions of miles away however creationists (of which I am not sure if I am one or not) don't agree that means that the universe is billions of years old. Do you know what i mean? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:52, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Not really. I gueessing the universe is probably older than the earth, it's only logical. But I (and that would include Einstein, Hawking, and Sagan) would have no way of telling, other than guess work.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:57, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::I don't much time thinking about such things anyway, way over my head! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:59, 20 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:MaxFletcher, first I don't appreciate you accusing me of being a parodist.  If you have a problem with me, we can deal with it on my talk pageAs for the Andromeda galaxy, there is no convincing evidence that it is millions of light years awayFurthermore, the evidence that astronomers use are based on [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth|assumptions about the age of the Earth]] and on [[Counterexamples to Relativity|relativistic effects]], both of which are very convincingly debunked here.  Leaving the mainstream distance to Andromeda on Conservapedia is inconsistent both with observed reality and with other scientific articles on Conservapedia. --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 01:05, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::The distance of the galaxies isn't disputed by anyone, not even creationists. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:13, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::According to one of the leading creationist website there are over [http://creationwiki.org/Galaxy 100 billion galaxies] in the observable universe. You tell me how big you think the universe is and then explain how so many galaxies could exist within such a space without the gravitational pull tearing them, and us, apart. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:19, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::I suspect there are far more than 100 billion galaxies in the Universe.  God's creation is truly infinite and breathtaking.  As for the visible universe, it's about 12,000 light years in diameter.  To answer your question about galaxies and gravity, I can think of a few possibilities: Perhaps there aren't as many galaxies and stars as mainstream science would have you believe, or perhaps gravity doesn't work exactly as mainstream science says it does, or perhaps God is preventing that happening to us somehow.  --[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 01:42, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
In response to Rob's question that started this thread, I'm fine with restoring the version that he cites.
+
:::"I would not have argued if Andy kept the disputes with JDano"?  Really?  You would have been OK with those disputes staying?  And yet, when I put them back you deleted them?  And you would like me to believe that Andy's archiving the page was his own idea, though he archived it 38 minutes after you requested it?  And you claim (in an edit comment) that "SamHB, you explicitly refused to comment on them at first."?  I commented on these issues all along. [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:06, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
  
In response to the other comments above, there are flaws of logic and verifiability associated with claims of time and distance for galaxies in the universeAssertions of time are based on untestable assumptions and should be avoided in a credible encyclopedic resource like this one.  Assertion of distance are less problematic but still have weaknesses in logical rigor.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 09:13, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Sam, you're duplicating discussions. They are now in the archives '''''and''''' on this talk page. They should be '''only''' on one or the other. Archiving the talk page obviously was '''not''' Andy's idea, as I suggested it. However, Andy was the one who did it -- he obviously thought it was a good idea. I did not tell him to archive ''everything'', just that the vast majority could be archived. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:09, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::You're right.  The material has plenty of links into it in the paragraphs aboveWhat you requested was that Andy "archive the discussions on your talk page", without suggesting any limit.  If you would have been OK with his archiving only older material, you wouldn't have objected to my "correcting" things, would you?  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:56, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Only if you don't duplicate the discussions -- frankly, it is sloppy editing to do otherwise. At the same time, I do have to say, that the discussions are over. There is no more dispute for any of them, and I don't want to be forced back into wasting 50% of my available time arguing over stuff that I thought were resolved weeks/months ago. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 11:03, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
  
:''Discussion moved to [[Talk:Starlight problem]]''
+
:::::Besides, Sam, why are you now so concerned about having this information back on the actual talk page? '''You explicitly refused to comment on the disputes earlier: [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=1368097]''' --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:11, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::I withdrew my offer to contribute when you made it clear, as you have done on a number of occasions, to me and others, that you view people's contributions as "acceptable" or "unacceptable", placing yourself as the arbiter of what can be said on this wiki.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 10:56, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
  
== How about this heatwave? ==
+
== Deletion of GinnyS's user and talk page ==
  
How are you beating the heat? [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 17:29, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
Please restore the talk page of user GinnyS.  (I don't specifically care about her user page.) She was recently blocked for objectionable behavior, and, much as I wish that hadn't happened, it did.  But her talk page had quite a bit of advice from me to her as a new user.  I advised her against precisely the things that she did.  Her talk page should stay up as an example of how to behave and how not to behave.  It could be useful to future people.  In any case, it is never necessary to delete user pages of people who have left.
  
: It's summer.  What took the heat so long to arrive, and why will it be leaving so soon?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:39, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
I have been trying to encourage Cons to refrain from useless activity on CP (see my talk page), and he admits that he has a problem in this area.  I think it would be useful to show that actions such as his deletion of Ginny's page are not productive.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] ([[User talk:SamHB|talk]]) 23:36, 27 August 2017 (EDT)
  
 +
== Kaspersky logo ==
  
:: Amen, Andy! After the wretchedly cold and wet spring we had, I'm going to enjoy the heat while it's here. I'll be shoveling snow soon enough! --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 19:08, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
Hello,<br />
:::I personally don't deal well with hot temperatures and high humidityEspecially because I melt metal for a livingI'll take spring/fall over this any day. [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 19:25, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
The issue of legal trademark reuse continues to confuse me. I recently created an article on [[Kaspersky Lab]] following the buzz about their potential connections to the Kremlin.  I was looking into whether it would be permitted to use their logo on that page, and cannot find a definitive answer.  As usual, Wikipedia (and Wikimenda commons) says that while a trademark, the logs are not copyrightable and therefore can be used basically in any way they wish. I can't find much on the matter on Kaspersky's own website, but just two official "blog" posts with their logo in two different sizes, clearly for reuse. [https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/kas-logo-jpg-2/] (older one here: [https://www.kaspersky.com/blog/kas-logo-jpg]). I would also be fine with just the "K" logo: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Kaspersky_Internet_Security_logo.png]<br />
... or maybe I was just wondering how you're beating the heat? But nevermind. [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 19:26, 21 July 2011 (EDT)
+
What do you think? Would it be alright for us to use one such logo on the page about them? Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 13:42, 31 August 2017 (EDT)
:The heat isn't really going anywhereRight now the forecast is 3 or 4 days of relief, sort of, then back in the 90sI wasn't trying to be political.  [[User:TerryB|TerryB]] 07:13, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:David, good questionIt would be "[[fair use]]" to use their logo as part of an entry about themThanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Thanks! I've added a low-resolution version of it to the article. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 09:52, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
==User:1990sguy==
 +
User:1990sguy is again following me around and acting in a hostile and intimidating mannerHe falsely claimed that I copied material from an article he wrote, which I denied "swearing on a Bible", and he called me a liarHe is being unnecessarily disruptive to my effort to write a full comprehensive and unbiased article on [[Donald Trump and social media]]I would appreciate your help on this matter. Many thanks, [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 18:01, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:'''''One:''''' Since when was removing [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Donald_Trump_and_social_media&diff=1372637&oldid=1372620 liberal/establishment/MSM bias] a bad thing? '''You're the one who is adding the bias and denying reality:''' contrary to your edits, the [[establishment]] '''IS''' a real, commonly-used, and objective term (and it has its own CP article), John McCain and Linsey Graham '''ARE''' RINOs (just look at their positions and voting records), and the WH staffers who oppose Trump's tweeting '''ARE''' on the moderate wing. Stop denying reality and giving articles MSM spin (the MSM makes Graham and McCain appear to be conservative, for example).
  
== Scotland ==
+
:'''''Two:''''' Please read [[Donald Trump achievements: Media and political correctness#Trump's establishment of a massive direct line to the public via social media]]. JDano clearly copied a lot of that section into the other article. You can tell because he uses a lot of the same wording, uses the same references, ''and he even formats the references MY way, which is a lot different than how he usually formats them as he uses the "cite web" ref template.'' '''BTW,''' I never said that it was a bad thing to copy from that article -- I just noted that it happened. I don't disapprove of his copying in this case, as it did not violate any copyright. JDano, if you really did not copy from that article, please '''prove''' to me that you did not. Everything in that action of the D.T. achievements sub-article is very-similar-to-identical to the [[Donald Trump and social media]] article where you transferred it.
  
Please could you unprotect the [[Scotland]] page. Some of the information is out of date (e.g. the government) and I would like to update it. Thanks. [[User:HollyS|HollyS]] 17:19, 22 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:'''''Three:''''' Wow, JDano, you constantly criticize me for going to Andy's talk page, and now you're doing the same thing. You are not following your own ethical standards. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:13, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
::Doing it now. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:29, 23 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::As I previously disclosed on the article talk page, it was copied from [[Donald Trump]], and I have not read the article that you mentioned above.  You continue to insult and harrass me for no good purpose. You call me a liar without any basis.  This is all very toxic. [[User:JDano|JDano]] ([[User talk:JDano|talk]]) 22:19, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
:::It isn't protected. I didn't have to unprotect it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:30, 23 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Please show me in which sections of the Donald Trump article you took the info. I already gave the specific link, [[Donald Trump achievements: Media and political correctness#Trump's establishment of a massive direct line to the public via social media]], where the info is essentially the same. Where in the Donald Trump article is info duplicated? I see no evidence that you took the info from the Donald Trump article, so I would appreciate it if you would show where you got it.
(Belated) thanks for unprotecting [[Scotland]], Andy. [[User:HollyS|HollyS]] 18:37, 1 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== User: RobS ==
+
:::In all honesty, your behavior in the 9 months has also played a large role in the toxicness. If you think that I'm only the one to blame, you're wrong, by a lot. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:38, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
:''Discussion moved to [[Conservapedia:Community Portal]]''
+
  
== Please delete ==
+
== Request ==
  
Please delete the page I have pointed out on recent changes!!! I have blocked the user that created it. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:09, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
+
Andy, would you please add [[:Category:Breitbart]] to the protected image, [[:File:Breitbartlogo.jpg]]? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:36, 10 September 2017 (EDT)
::I don't remember if it is standard practice or not, but you may want to delete the corresponding talk page as well, so it isn't hanging in the ether.  [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 20:35, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]])
:::It would help if someone provided a link.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:18, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::It has been deleted.  And the link would likely never have made it through the filters from the likes of me.  [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 21:21, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::::Um, I believe the user has been blocked. And, just for the record, most of the atheists I have met (there are a lot in my part of the world) tend to be just as kind and socially adept as anyone else. But I wouldn't know about atheists the US. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:49, 26 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Max, are you in the UK? Have you met Richard Dawkins? [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 00:41, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::No, I am not in the UK and no I haven't meet Richard Dawkins but I have read two of his books. Nonetheless most of the atheists I have met (there are a lot in my part of the world) tend to be just as kind and socially adept as anyone else including members of my family, colleagues and close friends. Most people in my part of the world are rather personal about their faith (or lack thereof) and don't feel the need to politicize nor pour scorn on the beliefs of others. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:47, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::::I see you live in NZ now.  Please see if you can find some statistics on NZ Christian charitable giving versus NZ atheists charitable giving. In the USA, even if church giving isn't counted, Christians give more [[per capita]] according to some data that I am acquainted with. See: [[Atheism and uncharitableness]] I do think that charitable giving is an important form of kindness and also it can a good aggregate indicator as well in terms of a population's kindness - especially in the developed world.  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]]
+
::::::::Interestingly, there was an international survey on this recently. NZ has about 1/3 of the population marking "No religion" on the most recent survey and [https://www.cafonline.org/navigation/footer/about-caf/publications/2010-publications/world-giving-index.aspx New Zealand came out as the most charitable country in the world next to Australia.]. But again, most of the atheists I have met (there are a lot in my part of the world) tend to be just as kind and socially adept as anyone else including members of my family, colleagues and close friends. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 00:56, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Max, comparing apples to apples is far more meaningful and significant. Namely, you have to compare NZ Christians vs. NZ atheists. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 01:24, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::I can think of no such study I'm afraid nor does it have any bearing on my comment. I am in fact one of the only Christians in my group of friends (outside of church) and everyone treats me, and each other, with kindness and respect. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:26, 27 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
::::::This discussion could be fruitful, if we're going to write an article which correlates personal characteristics with the ideology which people espouse. C and MF appear to disagree on this point, so perhaps they could collaborate on an article which provide evidence and/or counterexamples on the various aspects in question. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:16, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== MainPageRight request ==
  
== Elvis images ==
+
Andy, would you please add [http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/09/16/hungary-builds-a-wall-cuts-illegal-immigration-by-over-99-per-cent/ the 99% drop in illegal immigration in Hungary since building its border fence] to [[Template:Mainpageright]]? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:06, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
  
<strike> My requests somehow got stuck in an archive.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 00:21, 28 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:Excellent suggestion!  Posting now ....--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:02, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Thanks for adding. Would you please add a link to "[[border fence]]"? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 19:34, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Great suggestion.  Done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:57, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
  
:Here are some links to photos that might be usable in the article. One should be fair use, the other should be usable considering the rationale given.<br /></strike>
+
== Camelid Category change ==
<strike>:[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:ElvisPresleyAlohafromHawaii.jpg Elvis in ''Aloha from Hawaii'']</strike>
+
<strike>:Cheers, --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 10:00, 28 July 2011 (EDT)</strike>
+
<strike>::Since the original requests are archived somewhere, here is also one of him in the Army.</strike>
+
<strike>::[http://billslater.com/ep_usa_02.gif Elvis in the Army] Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 11:40, 28 July 2011 (EDT)</strike>
+
  
<strike>I dug up the original requests and put them at [[Conservapedia:Image upload requests]]--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 21:14, 29 July 2011 (EDT)</strike>
+
Hi,<br />
 +
I've been holding off from this project because it requires some protected page edits. However, I decided to go ahead and try to get it done. [[:Category:Camelid]] should not exist, since it is the singular rather than plural.  Would you please do the following?
 +
#Change the category on [[:Template:Nb_zl_camelids]] to [[:Category:Camelids]]
 +
#Unlock [[:Camelid]]
 +
#Delete [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Camelid&redirect=no Category:Camelid] to prevent future confusion
 +
Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:24, 18 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
<br /><br />
 +
Also, would you please delete [[Bill of Attainder]] since I completed the merge with [[Bill of attainder]], and that first page is not needed? Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 21:14, 18 September 2017 (EDT)
  
<strike>I put additional requests for the [[Bob Seger]] article, which I just started working on last night, as well. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 23:28, 30 July 2011 (EDT) </strike>
+
== Vandalism delete request ==
  
Never mind. Jpatt took care of the image requests. Thanks.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 15:15, 1 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Please delete the article "[[Dildo]]", which was created by a vandal (unless someone else does it first). I cannot add the speedy deletion tag to it because my university's server is not letting me access the page due to the inappropriate title. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 19 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:I tend to find excessive locking a significany inconvenience, but I highly doubt there will be any legitimate need to create an article under that name.  Should we just lock it?  This is the third creation of a page under that name by vandals. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:57, 20 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::We could also protect some of the other pages that vandal created, as at least some of them were created before. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:58, 20 September 2017 (EDT)
  
== Hello Conservapedia! ==
+
== Another Mainpageright blurb ==
  
Hi Mr. Schlafly. I'm a new user here, and I just wanted to thank you for making this resource. I look forward to continuing to contribute, and I hope my recent edits have improved the encyclopedia. Thanks! [[User:MorrisF]]
+
In addition to Hungary's successful [[border wall]], [http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/09/20/israels-southern-border-fence-100-effective-in-preventing-infiltration/ not a single illegal immigrant entered Israel's border with Egypt for the past 12 months] due to the border barrier there. I recommend adding this story to [[Template:Mainpageright]]. Hungary and Israel are the two main modern success stories with regard to border security.--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:48, 20 September 2017 (EDT)
:Ditto. This is a very good resource for students. I shudder to think what would happen if Wikipedia was the only reliable resources for my children. [[User:NickP|NickP]] 01:11, 28 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:'''In addition to my request above,''' please delete this page: [[Talk:User Abranch]]. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:00, 21 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::P.S. Deleted as requested.  As to your MPR suggestions, I prefer to vary the topics rather than repeatedly post similar points. But thanks and we can cycle back to your suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:49, 21 September 2017 (EDT)
  
::How old are your children? I don't think we're family-friendly enough to be a good resource for kids in elementary school. The lower range of our target audience would be prep school.
+
==Spelling fix needed==
 +
File:16th Amedment.jpg
 +
http://www.conservapedia.com/File:16th_Amedment.jpg [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 13:25, 23 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Corrected.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:31, 23 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Thanks. Could you lower the protection on this by one level so that the broken links can be resolved?  [[Template:US amendments]] [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 17:05, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
  
::There are other good encyclopedias, such as the [[New World Encyclopedia]] of the [[Unification Church]]. (I might be a bit biased, since I was a paid consultant to that project for a number of months.) However, remember that in general an encyclopedia is for the well-educated and is not intended to replace books, magazines or web sites, especially for educating young children. An [[encyclopedia]] is reference material, not a textbook. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:22, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Two requests ==
  
== Android App ==
+
Hello Andy, please delete the article [[National liberalism]]. It is an unsourced essay-like article created by an editor who is biased against the insurgent right-wing conservative European movements and is trying to frame them as liberal (if those parties are liberal, then does this mean that Angela Merkel -- the pro-EU and -mass migration globalist -- is conservative?).
Please give me your opinion on [[Talk:Main Page#Conservapedia Android App|the CP mobile app]]. I feel it could be very useful for your homeschoolers and for general promotion of the site.  May God Bless you.--[[User:FergusE|FergusE]] 22:22, 28 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
:I'd like to try it if I can find a way to download it. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:23, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Also, would you please add the fact that Angela Merkel's CDU (which is not any more Christian despite its name -- Merkel was the one who legalized gay "marriage" recently, for example, and doesn't mind that homeschooling is outright illegal) won its lowest result since 1949 and that the Alternative for Germany won seats for the first time?[http://www.breitbart.com/london/2017/09/25/merkel-scores-pyrrhic-victory-populists-beat-expectations/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:18, 25 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Andy, please reply to my requests here (the first one can wait, though, but the second one should be acted upon ''now''), along with David's. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 21:37, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Andy, '''in addition to everything else,''' please add these links to the "See also" section of the [[Similarities between Communism, Nazism and liberalism]] article:
 +
::*[[Nazism and socialism]]
 +
::*[[Communism and Nazism]]
 +
::*[[Totalitarian twins]]
 +
::*[[Molotov-Ribbentrop pact]]
 +
::--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:12, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
  
== Captcha ==
+
:::Added these as requested.  Not sure how to proceed on the other requests.  The first one seeks a deletion, which I'm reluctant to do.  The second one seems to suggest adding an editorial-type of comment, to which I am not opposed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:10, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::For the Merkel/CDU/AfD request, please add it to [[Template:Mainpageright]]. You don't have to worry about the other request right now, since I told him to improve the article at the "Problems with your "national liberalism" article" of [[User talk:TrueTory|his talk page]] (the article has '''serious''' concerns, mainly liberal bias, falsely calling several conservative European parties "liberal" and tying them to the Nazi Party -- all without any sources whatsoever). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:18, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::Andy, '''please''' take care of the Merkel/CDU/AfD [[Template:Mainpageright]] request, '''in addition to''' DavidB4's requests below. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:58, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
I'm going to have to agree with 1990sGuy about this "national liberalism" article. The subject needs to be bona-fide to be an article here, and there's a hint that it's painting other political parties as something they are not, then it has to go. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 00:40, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:OK, please edit or delete the entry as you think best.
 +
:As to the Merkel issue, I'm not following German politics enough to know whether a victory by her, albeit with a low percentage, is a good or bad thing.  It would depend on who her opponents were, I suppose.  Regardless, that news would not override the news from [[Alabama]], which I do know a lot about.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:44, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Andy, Merkel lost a major numerous of seats, and these seats were taken by the [[Alternative for Germany]] party, a conservative and Euroskeptic party. This election was about liberal globalists losing ground and conservative nationalists gaining. Please add to mainpageright -- I am OK with you doing it below the mention of Roy Moore. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:40, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::OK, thanks, I just haven't been following German politics.  I'll let the spectacular Alabama news sit there a bit longer and then post this good news from Germany.  Thanks for letting me know!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:04, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Well, then I will wait a bit until asking you again to post this -- but we shouldn't wait too long. In the meantime, would you please post [http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/09/20/israels-southern-border-fence-100-effective-in-preventing-infiltration/ this news], as you said you would above? Also, You inserted only one <nowiki>"<big>"</nowiki> tag at MPR, so everything below the Roy Moore news has big letters. Please fix. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:55, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::Posted news about the Germany election, as you suggested.  As to the Israeli wall, opposition to a [[border wall]] is not based on doubts that it would stop the flow of illegals, so the story is not really surprising or newsworthy.  But thanks for your suggestions.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 01:17, 28 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
[[National liberalism]] appears to be a real thing. See my post to the articles talk page.[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:03, 1 October 2017 (EDT)
  
I was attempting to fix some pages with 'cite errors' (no references section) but they already had external links and when I attempted to save them it brings up that annoying Captcha thing. Is there any way that this can be applied only to new links? [[User:Catherine|<small>CA</small>'''†'''<small>HERINE</small>]] 03:16, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
== another delete request ==
:I don't think there is a way to do that since the CAPTCHA is triggered the moment links actually appear in an article that had not been there before. In this case, the "Cite Error" prevented the link from appearing in the article, so by the CAPTCHA's logic, you added them.
+
:However, I suggested amending the CAPTCHA's Whitelist on the [[Conservapedia:Community Portal#CAPTCHA_Whitelist|Community Portal]], which would allow users to add links to trusted sites without going through the CAPTCHA. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 12:58, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
::Pardon me for being so dumb, but I've been meaning to ask you to explain this in more detail. I'm really a dimwit on this.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 23:23, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== "Wanted pages" appears broken ==
+
Hi, in addition to [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Camelid_Category_change|my earlier request]] and [[User_talk:Aschlafly#Two_requests|1990'sguy's request just above]],  would you please also delete [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Charts_And_Graphs&redirect=no this redirect] to help prevent assignment to the wrong category name? Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 10:33, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
  
Sorry, I wasn't sure where to raise this, but I was trying to load [[Special:WantedPages]] as it's always a good source for new articles, but it keeps coming up with a blank page, or it times out. Thought I would mention it, just in case there is a problem and it's not just my PC. Thanks! [[User:TracyS|TracyS]] 11:29, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:Thanks for those deletions! When you get a chance, would you also please take cre of the other two things I asked about:
:I can't get it either, so it's not just you.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 11:51, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:#Change the category on [[:Template:Nb_zl_camelids]] to [[:Category:Camelids]] (or just unlock it so I can)
 +
:#Unlock [[:Camelid]]
  
== Atheist hospitals ==
+
:Thank you again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 01:07, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Unlocked both for you.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 01:14, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Thank you! If you want to reprotect the template ([[:Template:Nb_zl_camelids]]), I'm finished with it. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 19:07, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::Re-protected, thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 01:10, 28 September 2017 (EDT)
  
Hello, Mr. Schlafly
+
== Requests related to administrative tasks ==
  
I listened to your debate concerning the use of a cross in the 9/11 memorial.  While I generally agree with you in this case (I am an atheist, and I don't care one way or another if there's a cross, and if it was indeed salvaged from the ruins then by all means include it), I have to take issue with your assertion concerning "atheist hospitals."  I often hear people say similar things such as "there are no atheist charities" and I must say that that doesn't really apply.  Atheism, in its rawest definition, means the lack of religion.  It is not a religion, though there are organizations of atheists such as the one led by the man you debated with (personally, I find the idea of "organized atheism" to be silly). Anyways, there are atheist hospitals and charities: by default, any charity that does not take a religious stance or objective would be "atheistic."  The Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, and Amnesty International would be good examples of charitable organizations that are not concerned with religion.
+
I recently received some requests from User: 1990sguy but I have been in the midst of engaging in a lot of matters off wiki so I have not been checking my email account devoted to Conservapedia matters. I see this situation continuing for a good while. Karajou has been busy with some things off wiki and it sounds like he may be busy for awhile.  
  
As an example, I, an atheist, am not defined by religionI simply see no reason to believe in any supernatural or divine actors.  Thus I do not do things in the name of what I don't believe.  I still assist those in need, I still care about others, and if I were to build a hospital I would not call it an "atheist hospital."  It would simply be a hospital, as there are many others out there.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 22:45, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
Andy, please make [[User:DavidB4]] an admin who does not yet have main page posting privilegesConsider doing the same for User: 1990sguy. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 08:10, 1 October 2017 (EDT)
[[Image:228130875 35181424e3.jpg|thumb|left|200px|[[Per capita]] [[atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]] in America give significantly less to charity than [[theism|theists]] even when church giving is not counted for theists. For more information please see: [[Atheism and uncharitableness]] ]]{{clear}}{{unsigned|Conservative}}
+
:Don't lump me in with your statistics.  You don't know me.  You know nearly nothing about me.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 23:43, 29 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
::Your post is confusing. Let's start with your redefinition of [[atheism]], which combines (1) disbelief in God with (2) having no opinion about God's existence, i.e., [[agnosticism]]. Do you mean that you are a non-believer or that you are an atheist (disbeliever)?
+
:I don't want to push or pressure, but I just want to note that I really have very little interest in main mage posting anyway, so I would be happy with such an arrangement.  Very happy, in fact, since I would find delete, protect, and unprotect quite useful.  Checkuser might also be helpful in my efforts of blocking abusable IPs. It's up to you, of course. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 17:15, 10 October 2017 (EDT)
::*Note: "non-believer" is either [[atheist]] (there is no God) or [[agnostic]] (there might be a God)
+
  
::First you say you are an "atheist" but then you redefine the term so that we don't know what you mean. Please be more clear and straightforward, or confine such meanderings to our [[Conservapedia:Debate Topics]], where ideology and rhetoric are allowed free rein.
+
::I did not notice this discussion until just now. I will continue to make MPR/main page requests on your talk page, assuming editing the main page is your main concern about me being an admin. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:29, 10 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::(but I will be content if you choose to only make DavidB4 an admin) --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:30, 10 October 2017 (EDT)
  
::I don't know what you mean about organized atheism being silly. Do you think [[mass murder]] is merely silly? The worst cases of genocide in the world's history were perpetrated by atheistic [[Communists]].
+
== MPR request ==
  
::"Not a religion" is misleading, because denying that any religion which accepts a Creator is '''in itself''' a religious viewpoint. Harboring and promoting such a POV is considered protected religious expression in the US (not merely [[free speech]]).  
+
Hello Andy, please add Steve Scalise's statement that his recent shooting made him even more pro-gun -- something that flies in the face of liberals: [http://thehill.com/homenews/house/353714-scalise-shooting-fortified-view-on-gun-rights] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 19:04, 3 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:Andy? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:49, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Your suggestion is good, but who is the intended audience for that proposed news item?  In some ways it might reinforce a negative view that young [[liberals]] have about [[Republicans]], coming so close on the heals of the mass murder in [[Las Vegas]]. It is might better to understand Stephen Paddock first.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:44, 4 October 2017 (EDT)--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:44, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::I would say everyone, as conservatives can use this story to counter liberals when they claim (emotionalistic arguments) that victims of shootings want more gun control or when they say mass shootings are proof that gun control is necessary, and as liberals who view CP would see their own assumptions countered. Celebrities and the media consistently push for more gun control after these shootings, and we've all heard of Brady and Giffords, so people who are influenced by the MSM and Hollywood might find it interesting that someone in a similar situation came out of it with a different opinion.
  
::If you are saying that you are merely an agnostic non-believer, rather than an atheist disbeliever, some of what you say might make more sense. Personally I think that people of good conscience who, while having no religious faith, are not opponents of faith or denier of God's existence, can actually contribute to building the Kingdom of Heaven.  
+
:::I don't think this will reinforce any negative views that liberals have, at least if worded the right way. Besides, liberals need to hear clear and strong arguments on why the 2nd Amendment is a good thing -- it seems like many of the "spokesmen" for conservatism in the past decades have been weak and accepting of the Left's assumptions, and ''that'' (seeing spokesmen for the opposite ideology fail to make good arguments) reinforces the negative views of liberals about conservatives. I saw a decent amount of media coverage wondering what Scalise now thinks about gun control, so this might surprise people, particularly liberals. We cannot go on the defensive on gun control because of a mass shooting -- if we do, we're accepting the Left's assumptions and letting them gain ground. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 20:01, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::'''Update:''' Scalise did another interview where he took an ''even stronger'' stance ''for'' gun rights, saying that it's still too early to consider a bump stock ban, and saying that liberals want a slippery slope that will slowly end gun rights in the U.S.[http://thehill.com/homenews/house/354151-scalise-little-bit-early-for-congress-to-ban-bump-stocks-after-vegas-shooting] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:03, 5 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::Andy, please reply. Frankly, I am getting tired of how slow things take here. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:29, 5 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::It's not a slow response, but skepticism about whether Scalise's position warrants a headline.  The [[GOP]] leadership opposes [[gun control]], period.  As I responded earlier, I don't see Scalise's position moving young [[liberals]] trying to make sense of the [[Las Vegas]] massacre. Insights that are directly about that are of greater interest than political posturing from [[D.C.]] I welcome comments by others on this issue.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 10:31, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::I don't know if this report specifically will be influential, but perhaps it could be.  I do think it's important to show why constitutional carry is important, but I'm not sure what form that should take.
 +
:::::::Unfortunately, in this case a civilian armed with a pistol might not have stopped this, since s/he would need to fire up very far, to a distance at which a pistol becomes inaccurate.  Firing back may have deterred the attacker, but it could have also put those in neighboring apartments at risk. Too bad no one there had a rife!  --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:36, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::I also would like to see more people pointing out that gun laws already make civilian possession, sale, and purchase of a machine gun illegal--clearly that law did a lot of good.  As we know, when someone wants a weapon for a crime, they don't typically go to Wal-Mart. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:39, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Andy, the GOP leadership, in general, is weak -- they're giving in to liberal pressure to enact gun control. And even if this bump stock ban doesn't really infringe of the Second Amendment, it is definitely a slippery slope to opening the door to additional gun regulations. In the U.S. and other countries, all the gun regulations weren't established in one law -- they were created in multiple small laws, each one of them appearing to be "reasonable," but either motivated by an emotionalistic response to a mass shooting or by faith in an expansive government. This bump stock ban is merely a continuation of the slippery slope to socialism.
 +
::::::::Frankly, I do think that regardless of how influential the news about Scalise is, I think it will be at least as much as the news about who the shooter was. The news about Scalise directly shatters the assumptions of the Left -- we're used to seeing people like Brady and Giffords who support gun control after being shot, but now we see someone doing the opposite (and Brady was a Republican, so the Scalise news might still surprise liberals). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:24, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
  
::I can understand why you might want to improve the reputation (or connotation) of the word "atheist" but please bear in mind that at Conservapedia we use it exclusively in the sense of '''disbeliever''' ("God does not exist" rather than non-believer (God may or may not exist). Editorial discussions will be improved by understanding our policy on the usage of the term. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 14:44, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::::::You persuaded me, 1990&#39;sguy, that Rep. Scalise's comments should be a MPR headline.  I've posted it with your linkThank you.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:33, 7 October 2017 (EDT)
:::Let me try putting it like this: you have a television, and I do not.  You spend some time watching the television, but since I lack a television I do not.  I am not part of any "reject TV" groups, nor do I advocate the abandonment of television. Am I to be confined to the role of "non television owner" in all that I do?  When I go for a walk, am I going for a walk as someone who does not watch TV?  Are my hands the hands of one who does not watch TV?  Of course notSometimes I feel that the religious are not capable of understanding that I do not have a religion.  Thus, they would find comfort in thinking such things as I might worship Darwin as a prophet and natural selection as a commandment.  But I don'tI just don't believe in any god or supernatural entities. My disbelief in, say, the divinity of Christ is not replaced by any other positions.  So, to try and slander me by placing me in a non-existent group whose deeds are proclaimed to be atrocious and lacking in charity does somewhat peeve me.  --[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 00:12, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
::::Based on this, I would say that you are (in our terms) not an "[[atheist]]" but a "nonbeliever". The group of nonbelievers clearly exists, since you are a member of it, and (as I began to say above) likely a good contributor to society as well. (I hope it is not slanderous to call you a "good person", but I'm happy to withdraw that dirty crack if it annoys you! ;-) --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:18, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Thank you, Andy -- I really appreciate it. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 15:15, 7 October 2017 (EDT)
  
== 4 Sysops believe that RobS should lose his Admin rights - Another Sysop emailed me  ==
+
== Delete and move request ==
:''Moved to [[Conservapedia:Community Portal]]''
+
  
== [[user:Jab512]] parodist? ==
+
Andy, please delete the redirect [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservative_Political_Action_Conference&redirect=no Conservative Political Action Conference], and then move the page [[CPAC]] to where the redirect was, in accordance with CP's standard of having the full name of an organization as the article title. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:51, 13 October 2017 (EDT)
  
This user has been spamming the main talk with the comments (liberal athiest). His contribs dont look good either. 1 week block would be nice?[[User:Kinetics|Kinetics]] 00:11, 31 July 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done as suggested. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:45, 14 October 2017 (EDT)
:Says an editor who signed up <s>today</s> an hour ago.--[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 01:08, 31 July 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Leadership ==
+
== Donald Trump achievements ==
[[File:Alleditors-Conservapedia-monthly.JPG|right|350px]]
+
From [[Leadership]]: Leadership is the skill of guiding the efforts of others in the performance of some tasks in order to achieve a goal.
+
  
A leader may have higher skills than his subordinates , although it is not essential. He directs activities through discipline and encouragement and displays the values expected. Where practicable he will explain why some action is needed rather than simply use his authority to demand compliance.  
+
In less than 10-and-a-half months of existence, the [[Donald Trump achievements]] article that I created received over 205,000 views. If this rate keeps up, it will have about 1 million views by the next Inauguration Day. Please move the article's link in MPL further up to give it increased visibility on the main page -- this is a topic that people are interested in, and it helps CP if we promote well-sourced and high-quality articles that people are interested in. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:44, 14 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:In addition, I recommend putting other "hot topic" articles at the top of the main page. I recommend moving the [[Globalism]] (which I think has doubled its number of page views since early this year or late last year) and [[European migrant crisis]] articles further up, and adding the [[Fake news]] article, which has received over 12,000 views in less than 11 months, to MPL. The latter two articles are also very well-sourced and have a high quality. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:53, 14 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Done as suggested.  You make great points.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:14, 15 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::Thank you (by the way, the Donald Trump achievements article got another 1,000 views since I last posted here). I am curious, however, about why you didn't add the fake news article? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:44, 15 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::I think [[fake news]] entry could be improved.  It doesn't convey the sense that it is used by [[Donald Trump]].  Thanks and I welcome more edits.  I'll try to work on it also.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:43, 16 October 2017 (EDT)
  
From [[World History Lecture Four]]: Under the theory that leaders, not ideas, define history, the Roman empire can be described as thriving when it had strong leaders (emperors), and failing when it did not. Julius Caesar (100-44 B.C.) was a strong leader, and he is credited with establishing the Roman empire in the place of the Republic, which did not have a strong leader. During Pax Romana, there was a series of strong emperors. But upon the end of the Pax Romana in A.D. 180, the empire was handled by weak, incompetent or crazy emperors, many of whom served only a brief period before being assassinated. The end came with a nine-year-old emperor being removed from power by a foreign invader. That could hardly be a surprise to anyone.
+
== Delete requests ==
  
[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 01:47, 1 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hello Andy, please delete these unnecessary redirects:
:RonLar, I'm an admirer of your work (at right). Welcome to CP and I hope this is the beginning of a good collaboration. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:54, 1 August 2011 (EDT)
+
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Sports_teams&redirect=no Category:Sports teams]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Scientific_controversies&redirect=no Category:Scientific controversies]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Scientific_disciplines&redirect=no Category:Scientific disciplines]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Scientific_pioneers&redirect=no Category:Scientific pioneers]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Camelid&redirect=no Category:Camelid]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Smart_phone&redirect=no Category:Smart phone]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Rino_backers&redirect=no Category:Rino backers]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Pop_music&redirect=no Category:Pop music]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Personality_disorders&redirect=no Category:Personality disorders]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Personal_development&redirect=no Category:Personal development]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Leisure_activities&redirect=no Category:Leisure activities]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Indoor_sports&redirect=no Category:Indoor sports]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Greek_alphabet&redirect=no Category:Greek alphabet]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Groff_family&redirect=no Category:Groff family]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Greek_words&redirect=no Category:Greek words]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Fringe_physics&redirect=no Category:Fringe physics]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:French_terms&redirect=no Category:French terms]
 +
Thanks. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:26, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
  
::Thanks - and thank you for uploading the pic, too. It shows the number of editors per month here at Conservapedia, based on the edits which are still undeleted on July 1, 2011.  
+
:I hate to add more to the already long list, but at some point these redirects probably should be deleted too, to clean up search results:
::*the lowest numbers of editors can be seen in late 2010 when some ill-advised experiments with the ''account creation'' procedure took place and the blockhammer was wielded even more often than usual.
+
:*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=%22Witness%22&redirect=no "Witness"]
::*generally, many people edited here at Conservapedia when Conservapedia aroused the interest of other media: the creation of Conservapedia was widely covered, the whole Lenski-thing got attention, then there was Andy Schlafly's visit at the [[Colbert report]], and the Bible project.
+
:*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=%27%27Witness%27%27&redirect=no <nowiki>''Witness''</nowiki>] (with double apostrophes rather than quote marks)
::*therefore it is quite interesting the the current surge isn't coinciding with unusual media covering...
+
:*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=%22Edmund_Wilson%22&redirect=no "Edmund Wilson"]
::*it's unknown how many of these editors
+
:*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=%22Rest_mass%22&redirect=no "Rest mass"]
::*I would assume that the number of ''unique editors'' in a month and the number of ''unique visitors'' correlates. Therefore it is quite a surprise that June 2011 broke the record of ''unique visitors'' - what about the first months of 2007?
+
:These page names actually contain the quote marks (or double apostrophes) which is unnecessary. Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 18:45, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
::''A good collaboration''? I had an enlightening exchange once with Andy about the  [[selection bias]] on the [[Talk:Essay:Best New Conservative Words/archive3#Selection Bias and Proposal for an Unbiased Test|Best New Conservative Words]]. And I addressed a challenge  by Ed Poor about [[User talk:Ed Poor#Censorship at Conservapedia|Censorship at Conservapedia]]. Here I'm still waiting for an answer. And Rob, will you be here to collaborate in the near future?
+
::Andy? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:56, 20 October 2017 (EDT)
::[[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 08:25, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Deleted many of them.  Will get the rest laterThanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:26, 20 October 2017 (EDT)
:::I'm not certain; I'm fairly disillusioned by the behavior of several sysops who constantly eradicate and exterminate any efforts, whatsoever, to even begin discussion of the sites problems.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:27, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Deleted the remainder.  Thanks for your patience.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 01:25, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
::::Your efforts were valiant, but they are doomed as long as you don't speak about the elephant in the room - or better: the lack of an elephant where there should be one! The excesses of the last days should have been avoided! [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 12:53, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::You're welcome. Here are more:
:::::We've had some private discussions, and I think there may be a way out of this mess. Best to avoid problem users, focus on coherent proposals and I'll do what I can to mitigate bullying, abuse and harassment of editors. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:22, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Parasite&redirect=no Category:Parasite]
RonLar, if you want to create a more collaborative spirit and increase the esprit de corps of Conservapedia, my suggestion at the present time is for a group of Conservapedians to pick a topic and then have editors create as many quality articles relating to that topic that are at least 500 words long. I would suggest that the articles not be stubs because that is not going to enhance the reputation of Conservapedia nor give it a sense of accomplishment. I created this project for a couple of editors who seemed interested in this topic: [[Conservapedia:Atheism Project]] I suggest creating a project with more widespread appeal because atheism is not on most people's radar in terms of the public at large - especially in the United States. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 09:25, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cateogry:Printers&redirect=no Cateogry:Printers]
:I'm afraid you lost me there. My specialty isn't long articles, but pretty diagrams. Maybe you wanted to address Ed Poor? [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 09:36, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Romance_languages&redirect=no Category:Romance languages]
::RonLar, please create a graph/diagram on the number of prominent [[Atheism and obesity|obese atheists]] since 1962 which is when prayer was taken out of American schools as I am sure Mr. Schlafly would be interested in such a graph. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 10:19, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Religious_terms&redirect=no Category:Religious terms]
:::If you can provide me with tangible data I'll be happy to oblige. From what I've seen until it seems to be impossible to differ an atheist from a Christian just by weighing their bodies... [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 10:32, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Religious_broadcasting&redirect=no Category:Religious broadcasting]
:::::::13% of adult Americans were obese in America in 1962 (23,312,013); 33.8% of adult Americans were obese in 2010 (104,355,992), which is about right considering approximately 70% of Americans consider themselves Christians (approximately 125,526,223). --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 14:34, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Structural_geology&redirect=no Category:Structural geology]
::::::::Roughly half of all Americans are women. And 50% of al Americans live within 50 miles of their birthplace. Sounds about right: women don't travel, men won't stay at home. [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 14:44, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:State_senators&redirect=no Category:State senators]
::::::::::Except, of course, for those outliers like my hubby and me. He livess 10 miles away from the house he was born in. And my sons are ''still'' living in the house they were born in. Me, on the other hand, I'm 1800 miles away from my hometown.--[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 14:53, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:State_legislatures&redirect=no Category:State legislatures]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Sports_tournaments&redirect=no Category:Sports tournaments]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Sports_leagues&redirect=no Category:Sports leagues]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Spiritual_warfare&redirect=no Category:Spiritual warfare]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Space_missions&redirect=no Category:Space missions]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Space_colonization&redirect=no Category:Space colonization]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Soft_drinks&redirect=no Category:Soft drinks]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Slavic_languages&redirect=no Category:Slavic languages]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Ship_sinkings&redirect=no Category:Ship sinkings]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:War_criminals&redirect=no Category:War criminals]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Vector_analysis&redirect=no Category:Vector analysis] ('''please remove''' the categories from the protected redirect [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Irrotational&redirect=no Irrotational])
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:United_States_monetary_policy&redirect=no Category:United States monetary policy]
 +
:::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:United_States_election_law&redirect=no Category:United States election law]
 +
:::::--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 12:53, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::Done as requested.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:44, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
:::::::Thank you--unfortunately, many of those were created by me when I moved the pages to their correct names. It seems I can't move a page without creating a redirect, which while sometimes helpful, can also be messy.  Thanks for cleaning that up! Would you also please delete the following when you get the chance? There are a lot of these.
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=.40_S&redirect=no .40 S] was left behind after page was moved when title was fixed
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Human_behavior&redirect=no Category:Human behavior]
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Economic_debates&redirect=no Category:Economic debates]
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Fictional_characters&redirect=no Fictional characters]
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Government_finance&redirect=no Government finance]
 +
:::::::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Philosophical_systems&redirect=no Philosophical systems]
 +
:::::::Thank you again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:22, 23 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::::::::Deleted as requested.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:54, 23 October 2017 (EDT)
  
::::Conservative: Here's a suggestion of two topics to collaborate on [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy]] and [[Conservapedia:New sysop training page|Conservapedia:Sysop accountability]]. Now, if we can only keep User:Karajou from blocking and exterminating users volunteering their time and offering the benefit of their experience as wiki editors, we could possibly save ourselves a few weeks or years. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:33, 2 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Thanks, would you please also delete the following when you get a chance?
 +
*<strike>[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Cumuliform_cloud&redirect=no Cumuliform cloud] - non-uniform redirect</strike> Although non-uniform, it could actually be useful. Search results can stay messy for this, I'd say.
 +
*[[:File:Obama's second oath.jpeg]] - unused duplicate of [[:File:Obamas second oath.jpeg]]
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Devil%27s_Advocate&redirect=no Devil's Advocate] - non-uniform redirect
 +
Thanks again!  Clearly, there is no rush--this is just standard cleanup. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 14:48, 26 October 2017 (EDT)
 +
::Done as requested.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 09:27, 12 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 18:05, 13 November 2017 (EST)
  
== ***Featured article - please help*** ==
+
Please delete the redirect [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Popular_songs&redirect=no Category:Popular songs] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 12:00, 24 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:Done as requested!  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:26, 24 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::I found some more redirects to delete:
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Unconstitutional_conditions&redirect=no Category:Unconstitutional conditions]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Train_operating_companies&redirect=no Category:Train operating companies]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Tournament_theory&redirect=no Category:Tournament theory]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Time_management&redirect=no Category:Time management]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Third_party_standing&redirect=no Category:Third party standing]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Terrorism_victims&redirect=no Category:Terrorism victims]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Technology_commentators&redirect=no Category:Technology commentators]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Medical_history&redirect=no Category:Medical history]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Maori_linguistics&redirect=no Category:Maori linguistics]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Landlocked_seas&redirect=no Category:Landlocked seas]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Independent_activists&redirect=no Category:Independent activists]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Hillary_Clinton_advisors&redirect=no Category:Hillary Clinton advisors]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Health_promotion&redirect=no Category:Health promotion]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Satirical_magazines&redirect=no Category:Satirical magazines]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Rovas_scripts&redirect=no Category:Rovas scripts]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Quantum_gravity&redirect=no Category:Quantum gravity]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Punk_rock_bands&redirect=no Category:Punk rock bands]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Professional_wrestling&redirect=no Category:Professional wrestling]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Professional_degrees&redirect=no Category:Professional degrees]
 +
::*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Sailing_ship_types&redirect=no Category:Sailing ship types]
 +
::*(''not a delete request'') Please '''add''' the code <code><nowiki>{{See also|Conservative news websites}}</nowiki></code> to the top of the "News" section of the [[Conservative links#News|Conservative links]] article.
 +
::*In addition to all the above, I don't know what to do with [[:Category:Conservative Political Organizations]]. I removed the CATO Institute from the category, the only article on it. This category is completely redundant with "Category:Conservative Organizations", but I don't feel strongly on this.
 +
::--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 12:45, 24 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::Andy? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 12:51, 25 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::::I just promoted your account to delete privileges.  However, please use carefully and please do not delete any content entries without checking first here.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:31, 25 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::Thank you. I will go to you for every page that I'm not sure about (along with every content article), just like I have either asked you or DavidB4 about uploading questionable imagages even though I have image upload rights. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:20, 25 November 2017 (EST)
  
The Featured Article Committee chose [[Elvis Presley]] for this week's article, but we need someone who can edit the main page to change it for us. Thanks a bunch! --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 10:49, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Conservative of the Year 2017 ==
  
To add: The only sysop on our committee is on vacation. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 10:55, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hello Andy, in case you haven't seen, I created the [[Conservative of the Year 2017]] page. Of course, feel free to add, or post on the main page. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:46, 9 November 2017 (EST)
:I'll get it. Thanks.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 15:11, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thanks much!!!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 15:16, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
What was the problem with the Presley family photo? Was it copyright? It's OK, I was just wondering. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 18:20, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Fabulous work!  I'll think of who else to add as nominees.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:15, 9 November 2017 (EST)
  
:Its source was a broken link.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:20, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Veterans ==
::OK. Maybe I will find a replacement that is fair use and request it later. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 22:59, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Capthca thing ==
+
Hello Andy, I probably should have asked you this earlier today, but would you please make an MPR blurb about how President Trump has been helping veterans, linking to [[Donald Trump achievements: Veterans]]? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:22, 11 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:Done, thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:30, 12 November 2017 (EST)
  
Hi Andy, hope you are well. I am getting trouble from the captcha box whenever I try to add a link. Is there any way to turn it off? It was especially annoying yesterday when I blocked a vandal and had to revert a whole lot of pages. It took me ages because each page had links. Thanks and let me know. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 21:57, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Roy Moore ==
  
:I just gave your account SkipCaptcha.  Sorry for not granting your account that privilege earlier.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:55, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Andy, would you please add [[Roy Moore]]'s article to the main page, at least until the general election? Would you please add a "featured article section up top for that, to avoid having Moore's article be lost among the other articles after a reshuffle? I think his article has a very high quality. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 13:55, 12 November 2017 (EST)
::Just saw that, thanks! It makes it a lot easier to revert vandalism. Enjoy the rest of your day/evening (whatever it is over there). [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:56, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Also, would you please add to MPR [https://twitter.com/MooreSenate/status/930128259035082756 Moore's statement that McConnell should resign], as well as the fact that the lawyer representing the fifth accuser, Gloria Allred, is a liberal who supports abortion (and actually had an abortion before it was legalized), homosexual "marriage", and was a Democrat delegate this election[http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/13/beverly-young-nelson-roy-moore-gloria-allred/]? The second blurb about Allred undermines her client's claim to being a conservative Republican (why would a conservative go to her?). --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:32, 13 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::''In addition to the above,'' I would like to let you know of [https://twitter.com/ThomasWictor/status/930295318691831808 Thomas Wictor's analysis] of the claims made against Moore, in which he shows that Moore is innocent. I recommend sharing this with whomever necessary. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:20, 14 November 2017 (EST)
  
== Hi, I would like to apply for upload rights in order to edit economics articles ==
+
You could also add to MPR the hypocrisy of how the media is failing to report on ''criminal'' charges against Bob Menendez which otherwise are similar to the allegations against Moore,[http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2017/11/10/study-networks-loud-on-roy-moore-allegations-quiet-on-bob-menendez-trial/][http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/14/cruz-media-ask-democrats-same-questions-menendez-asked-judge-moore/] or how the same Republicans condemning Moore are ''defending'' Menendez.[http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/lindsey-graham-calling-moore-step-aside-one-week-went-nj-testify-dem-bob-menendez/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 17:48, 14 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:I would appreciate it if you would ''at least reply'' to my suggestions. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:13, 14 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::Your suggestions are very good.  This topic is top priority.  The items posted just seemed slightly more compelling than the links you recommended.  For example, posting a link to a Twitter feed is not ideal.  But thanks so much for the terrific ideas, which are spot on.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 01:05, 15 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::Thanks. What do you think about adding [http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/roy_moore_announces_12_testimo.html this] to MPR? Moore's campaign is giving good evidence here to the contrary of the allegations against him. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 19:39, 15 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::::Andy, I know you're busy (I saw you at Judge Moore's rally today), but would you please explain why this is not something to add, if you rejected it? I like to know ''why'' on things like this. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:37, 16 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::Traveling to and from Birmingham yesterday kept me mostly off ''Conservapedia''.  Sorry!
 +
:::::Your suggestions are great but in light of our audience, I think the [[double standard]] concerning [[Al Franken]] is slightly better.  But let's find a way to work your best links onto the Main Page.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:33, 17 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::::::Sounds good. I also found this link, where Franklin Graham notes that the people condemning Moore for these allegations are guilty of doing even worse things.[http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/franklin-graham-people-denouncing-roy-moore-are-guilty-of-doing-much-worse/article/2641093] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:44, 17 November 2017 (EST)
  
Mr. Schlafly, I have an MS in Finance and Statistics, currently work in industry on thew buy side, and would like to upload screenshots from Bloomberg to illustrate essentially how bad the economy is under Obama.  I have made several important contributions already which belong to the Federal Debt Limit article (these contributions have already been slandered by liberals, but they still are part of our article.)  If you would like me to give you more details about my background, let me know! [[User:HP|HP]] 23:25, 3 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Is there any chance that you would post the fact that several women have come out defending Moore's character, one of the things I posted above? Breitbart News also published an article about this: [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/18/character-witnesses-former-girlfriends-employees-childhood-friends-defend-moore/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:15, 18 November 2017 (EST)
  
:Upon further thought, Andy, I don't think I need upload rights quite yet.  I was unaware there was a page for users to ask for requests.  i don't think my edits will be that frequent right now.  Thanks! [[User:HP|HP]] 16:20, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done, thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:19, 19 November 2017 (EST)
  
===Other request===
+
== Unlock request ==
I would like to request image uploading privileges as well. It would make improving articles easier so I wouldn't have to wait for my requests to be processed. I believe I have already made some substantial contributions to articles I was working on. Thank you for processing my request.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 12:31, 4 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
=== Response to requests ===
+
Hello,<br />
 +
Would you please unlock the image [[:File:567rugyhj.png]] so I can give it a meaningful name as requested by 1990'sguy?  I will then correct the file references on other pages so nothing breaks.  Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:17, 27 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:In addition to DavidB4's request above, what is your opinion of adding [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/11/27/never-trump-plant-in-alabama-write-in-against-conservative-roy-moore-attended-liberal-dem-doug-jones-fundraiser/ this story] to MPR? The MSM widely reported on the write-in challenger, but they overlooked the fact that he is apparently a liberal trying to steal the election from Moore. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:53, 27 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::Brilliant suggestion.  Absolutely brilliant.  Done.  Please feel free to expand on my new entry about [[Doug Jones]] also!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:18, 28 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::I will expand the page when I get time, hopefully this evening. I've been storing good information about Jones and his leftist positions on Roy Moore's talk page. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 09:27, 28 November 2017 (EST)
 +
::::Thank you for the unlock! I've renamed it to [[:File:European Union flag.png]] and fixed all file references.  I also took the opportunity to add categorize the file while I could. If you would like, you can lock it again as far as I am concerned. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 10:47, 28 November 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::Re-locked it, thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:10, 28 November 2017 (EST)
  
Thanks for the requests.  Additional privileges are based on merit and requests for those privileges are taken under advisement.  It requires surveying other contributors too.  We'll be doing a general review and hopefully you can continue to contribute in the meantime.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:32, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== More delete requests ==
:Sounds good. I will continue to contribute as I have then, in between family vacations and yardwork. Thanks much again!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 11:16, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
Have you processed our requests above yet? If not, that's OK. I understand that you are bust. Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 13:17, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hello again,<br />
 +
When you get the chance, would you please delete:
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Musicla_Forms&redirect=no Category:Musicla Forms] (typo in redirect name left behind after page move)
 +
*[[:File:Kukulcan.jpg]] (unused and unneeded duplicate)
 +
*[http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Liquid_crystal_display_(LCD)&redirect=no Liquid crystal display (LCD)] (Unneeded and confusing redirect left after page move)
 +
*[[:File:Untitled.JPG]] and [[:File:Chordinv.JPG]] (unneeded and unused duplicates of [[:File:Resolutionnote.JPG]])
 +
*[[:File:Parabola.jpg]] (unneeded and unused duplicate of [[:File:Parabola.png]])
  
==Christians in name only?==
+
Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:04, 28 November 2017 (EST)
Hi Andy,
+
:Done as requested.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 13:50, 29 November 2017 (EST)
  
I came upon [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-14417362 this rather shocking piece] today, and wondered whether there's already an article for this phenomenon? I couldn't find one by searching, but perhaps it has a non-obvious name. If not, I'll begin one. Thanks, [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 08:43, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thanks!
:Do you mean [[Cafeteria Christianity]]?--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 08:50, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::As general house-keeping, would you also please delete:
::I considered that, but this seems even more bizarrely irrational - cafeteria Christianity, as I understand it, involves believing in the basics of Christianity, but picking and choosing specific beliefs, often moral or social exhortations. These are people who call themselves Christians, go to church services, have priests in clerical garb etc., but overtly don't believe even in God or the historicity of Jesus, let alone the Trinity or the infallibility of Scripture. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 09:57, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::[[Talk:Los Angeles deputy describes rescuing newborn buried alive]] (talk page requesting deletion of main page, which has been deleted)
:::Well, that sounds more like [[Liberal Christianity]].--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 10:05, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::[[:Category:Northwest Territories of Canada]] (Empty category)
::::Or [[Unitarian Universalist Association|Unitarianism]] [[User:JohnMcL|JohnMcL]] 10:08, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::[[User talk:Aeneas]] (talk page requesting deletion of main page, which has been deleted)
::::Ah yes, I'd been looking for 'liberal theology'. Thanks. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 10:11, 5 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thank you again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:26, 30 November 2017 (EST)
  
== Bible Against Simulated Violence Project ==
+
:::Done as requested.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 16:02, 30 November 2017 (EST)
  
I'm on a hunt for some Bible verses to show that violence in arcade games is wrong. Do you know of a passage that can be interpreted as against simulated violence? I can think of about two off of the top of my head, but I want to hear what you think. --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 00:16, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
==More unlock requests==
 +
Hello again,<br/>
 +
I'm doing some category moves for 1990'sguy, but there are some pages I cannot recategorize because they are protected. Would you please unlock the following pages so I can recategorize them? (I may also rename the first two files)
 +
*[[:File:Gwtgg.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:786980.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:Casmier.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:John McCain official portrait 2009.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:Theodore roosevelt.jpg]]
 +
*[[:Essay:Donald Trump One Two Body Blow]]
 +
*[[:File:Sheriff Clarke.png]]
 +
Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:44, 1 December 2017 (EST)
  
== Horace  ==
+
Also, as I move pages, the wiki forces me to leave a redirect behind, which is not always helpful.  When you get the chance, would you also please delete the following pages, left behind after my page moves today?  Sorry about the mess!
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:2016_presidential_election&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:American_war_heroes&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Population_politics&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:United_States_Air_Force_aircraft&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Heads_of_government&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Current_Heads_of_government&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Neoconservative&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Alzheimer%27s_disease&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Factors_and_methods_of_production&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Football_soccer&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Football_sports&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Forensic_science&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Philosophy_of_science&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:German_politicians_by_party&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Global_warming_skeptics&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Hindi_words_and_phrases&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Social_Democratic_Party_of_Germany_politicians&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Homosexuals_in_the_military&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Instruments_and_methods_of_torture&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Manual_Of_Style&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Marketing_research_companies&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Messier_objects&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Particle_physics&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Phases_of_matter&redirect=no
 +
*http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Category:Physics_experiments&redirect=no
 +
It is QUITE a list--there is certainly no rush, but I just don't want to leave a mess and confuse people when they are setting categories.  Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 17:00, 1 December 2017 (EST)
  
I think that Horace should be unblocked. I have posted this request to RobS's page but you were the blocking sysop. Could you please review the block? --S0CK0FH0RACE 22:33, 6 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Isn't there a box you can uncheck when moving, to prevent this?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:28, 1 December 2017 (EST)
  
== Request for SkipCapcha rights ==
+
:::Unfortunately, no.  I have a check box for "add to watchlist" and another for "move associated talk page" but that is all.  [http://archnet.us/temp/Move%20page%20-%20CP.JPG Here is a screenshot of what I see].  I have been assuming that redirect-free moves are reserved for administrators, but perhaps this is not the case? --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:23, 2 December 2017 (EST)
 +
::::Just promoted your account to "delete" privileges.  You can do these requests directly yourself now.  Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 16:27, 2 December 2017 (EST)
  
Andy, please give my Conservapedia account SkipCaptcha rights.  [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 04:42, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Oh!! Okay, thank you very much! Would you still please unlock those those pages I mentioned above at some point? Thanks again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:38, 2 December 2017 (EST)
:All administrators [[Special:ListGroupRights|have]] that right already. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 07:52, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thanks. I saw that one of the Admins (DouglasA) had SkipCapcha listed [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=sysop HERE] and I thought there may be some task or tasks at CP that requires SkipCapcha for Admins. I was tired when I posted this and should have realized there was no task or tasks (or at least very few tasks) for Admins that require SkipCapcha when I made the post. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 13:21, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Deceptive statement by John Calvert ==
+
:::::On a side note, I believe I have just about finished the rewrite of [[United States presidential election, 1884]].  I know you were interested in my suggested changes, so I just wanted to let you know. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 17:22, 2 December 2017 (EST)
 +
::::::Unlocked as requested, and I look forward to reviewing [[United States presidential election, 1884]]!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 21:11, 2 December 2017 (EST)
  
''Conservative'' asked me to bring the following to your attention:
+
It seems that [[:Template:User McCain]] has cascading protection turned on, which means I still cannot edit [[:File:John McCain official portrait 2009.jpg]]. Would you please change or remove protection on [[:Template:User McCain]] so I can make this edit?  All the others are done, and can be re-protected.  Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 14:42, 4 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:In addition to DavidB4's request above, would you please add President Trump's endorsement of Roy Moore and/or SCOTUS's upholding of the travel ban to MainPageRight? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:56, 4 December 2017 (EST)
 +
::Not to distract from [[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]]'s request above, but thank you Andy for the unlock.  I'm done with all the pages now, so they can be locked again. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 17:41, 4 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:::Done, thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:18, 4 December 2017 (EST)
  
At [[Atheism]], we find the the following:
+
== Jerusalem ==
{{QuoteBox|John Calvert, a lawyer and [[intelligent design]] proponent wrote:
+
{{cquote|The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the [[United States]] held that atheism is a [[religion]] and therefore it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently public schools are promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of [[Evolution|materialistic theories of origins]].}}
+
}}
+
  
I commented on the [[Talk:Atheism#Deceptive statement by John Calvert|talk page]]:
+
Surely the news about the embassy in Jerusalem merits an MPR item.[https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/12/trump-jerusalem/547568/] [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 21:54, 5 December 2017 (EST)
{{QuoteBox|''The Supreme Court of the United States  held that corporates are persons and therefore they can marry.'' (see [[Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission]])
+
:Yes, this is big news -- finally, we have a president willing to buck the liberal/globalist status-quo. However, is it better to wait until the announcement is official tomorrow to post on Mainpageright? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:18, 5 December 2017 (EST)
}}
+
::Here's a left-wing double standard: Chuck Schumer, who claims to support the move, criticized Trump for "indecisiveness" on whether to make the decision.[http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/363465-schumer-advised-trump-on-declaring-jerusalem-as-israels-capital] However, what Trump will do is much more than what any other president, including the Democrats (and probably also Hillary Clinton), ever did. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:09, 5 December 2017 (EST)
{{QuoteBox|This is of course as wrong as the statement:
+
}}
+
{{QuoteBox|''The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the United States held that atheism is a religion and therefore it cannot be promoted by a public school.''
+
}}
+
{{QuoteBox|In the first case there was a verdict that a corporate has to be treated like a person under the First  Amendment, while in the second case it was found that ''atheism'' has to be treated like a religion, again only under the First Amendment.  
+
}}
+
:::(See [http://www.leagle.com/xmlResult.aspx?xmldoc=20051097419F3d678_11025.xml&docbase=CSLWAR2-1986-2006 KAUFMAN v. McCAUGHTRY 419 F.3d 678 (2005)])
+
{{QuoteBox|Conservative, you can't be blamed for the deceitful reasoning of John Calvert, but you should have learned over the time that you have to be careful with second-hand quotations - you should go to the original source!
+
}}
+
{{QuoteBox|To make it as clear as possible: '''The Seventh Judicial Circuit Of the Court of Appeals of the United States said nothing about the promotion of atheism by a public school''', though this is implied by John Calvert.
+
}}
+
{{QuoteBox|Could someone remove John Calvert's deceptive statement, please?
+
}}
+
So, could you give us your legal insight?  Thanks [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 18:04, 7 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Horace again ==
+
::(edit conflict, responding to first two postings above) I don't object to this but, as I've mentioned before, our focus here is on American issues.  This news is not much of a headline in the [[United States]], or controversial here, and we're not experts on issues local to the [[Middle East]].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:59, 5 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:::Really? I've seen a lot local Israel stuff of MPR. After all, it's the Holy Land. Up to you, I suppose. A move like this would normally be a huge deal. But there are at least four other major stories all approaching their climaxes: Roy Moore, North Korean nukes, the Mueller investigation, and the tax bill. So I can understand if it gets lost in the shuffle. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:32, 6 December 2017 (EST)
 +
::::I think it should be posted on MPR for a few reasons:
 +
::::*This news '''is''' a major headline in the United States, and it's also controversial even in the U.S. -- every news outlet, including the MSM and conservative media, is putting this story at the top of their front pages -- and it will become even more major once President Trump gives his speech on it, where he will presumably say do we're expecting him to do.
 +
::::*This story is more than just about the Middle East, it's about official U.S. policy in the Middle East.
 +
::::*This issue is very important to both evangelical Christians, many Jews (even Democrats, actually, but mainly Republicans), and possibly other conservative Christian denominations.
 +
::::--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:41, 6 December 2017 (EST)
  
I am not sure if you noticed the above request but I asked if you could review Horace's block as the blocking sysopI think if you look at the edit history you will agree that the length of the block was excessive.  --[[User:Spheniscidae|Spheniscidae]] 17:24, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::This seems like something worth mentioning to me as well.  It's true that that is more of an issue in the middle east than here, but consider this: The UN has been attacking Israel for a while now, making proclamations that Israel is not a legitimate country, should give its land to their Arab neighbors, are aggressors, etc. Israel (rightly) pulled funding from the UN, but that's about all they can do.  Now amidst all of this pressure from the UN, the US is taking a stand for their legitimacyBy moving to Jerusalem, we say to the world that we believe Israel has a legitimate claim on their capitol. I know some people in the U.S. really don't care about Israel, but there is a lot more to this move than just a matter of scenery, convenience, etc. We are taking a stand in the view of the world to say that we support IsraelThey have constantly been the victims, but we are saying that we still do support them. We are also going against the UN and its agenda. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 23:53, 6 December 2017 (EST)
  
:The general policy here is for Sysops to respect each others' blocks.  I rarely change someone else's blockAppeals should be made to the person who did the block.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:57, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::I've spent a lot of time speaking with Israelis and learned enough to know that these issues are complex and difficult to understand from afarFor example, I don't know how supportive Israelis themselves are of the United States moving our embassy to Jerusalem, and I don't know what it really means for that international cityCertainly we have the right to do that and I support President Trump's decision, but I don't pretend to understand all the local implications halfway around the world.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:13, 7 December 2017 (EST)
::Hi Andy, just so you know there is no way to appeal a block with many, if not all, of the sysops as talk pages are locked and the email system disabled. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 22:39, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
:::True, but in this case you (Andy) were the blocking sysop. --[[User:Spheniscidae|Spheniscidae]] 23:17, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::::Agreed, there is a lot we can't see, and I don't know how helpful this will be, or what other impacts it will have.  I do know that Benjamin Netanyahu told former president Obama on at least one occasion that "Mr. President, it is time to move the embassy." I also know that he has already spoken in support of it when the issue was more recently discussed. (see: [https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/88002/netanyahu-embassies-jerusalem]) Still, you are right, we don't know the inner workings of Israeli politics. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 00:44, 7 December 2017 (EST)
  
::::Oops ... but I checked the block log and I wasn't the last person to block him. In reply to Max, you make a good point and do you have a suggestion for an appeal process that doesn't take up too much time?--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:48, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::I can say for sure that Israel's leaders strongly supported Trump's decision: [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/06/netanyahu-thanks-trump-historic-decision-recognize-jerusalem-israels-capital/][http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017/12/06/israel-thanks-trump-jerusalem-recognition/] Also, Israelis think more highly of President Trump than the people of any other country, as of June 2017.[http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/] The announcement has undoubtedly increased that rating. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 08:48, 7 December 2017 (EST)
:::::Is there any way in the software to block a user but allow him to post to a single page, like an "appeals page"? Any further abuse could easily be reverted and users posting right taken away. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 23:52, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
::::::The last block was as follows: 22:07, 3 October 2008 Aschlafly (Talk | contribs) blocked Horace (Talk | contribs) with an expiry time of 5 years (account creation disabled) ‎ (Violated 90/10 rule against talk, talk, talk). There was a subsequent "reblock" but that was by TK and was merely to remove email. Are you suggesting that TK needs to be consulted?  --[[User:Spheniscidae|Spheniscidae]] 23:54, 8 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::::Thanks for the excellent points.  It may be a brilliant move.  The push for it did not originate with Trump, but he is the decisive leader who got it done.  Moreover, as implied above, Obama refused to do it, so that suggests it is a step in the right direction.  Appreciate the insights about this above.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:21, 7 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::::::::Congress voted to move the embassy back in 1995. In 2010, the U.S. opened an oversized consulate in Jerusalem that's ready to serve as an embassy. All they would have to do is switch the signs on the gates. All the same, it doesn't look like it's gonna happen anytime soon. [[User:PeterKa|PeterKa]] ([[User talk:PeterKa|talk]]) 05:21, 8 December 2017 (EST)
 +
::::::::::::Yes, I don't see why they need to build a new building in Jerusalem to be the embassy -- opponents of moving the embassy in the administration could use this to stall the move to make sure it never takes place. At the same time, at least President Trump actually recognized Jerusalem (a statement of reality) and started taking steps to move the embassy. His predecessors were just talk: [https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/939006911629869056] The people of Tel Aviv also seem to like this decision: [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/dec/7/tel-aviv-residents-us-embassy-move-let-jerusalem-h/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:26, 8 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:::::::::::::Jewish scholars seem opposed ... or are they merely anti-Trump? [http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/363939-more-than-100-jewish-studies-scholars-sign-petition-opposing-trump]
  
:::::::Here's the [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3AHorace&type=block block log].  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:12, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
 
  
Apparently, Horace refuses to change his little tune, even after a few years of being blocked for it.  What we have is a record of harassment, socks, more harassment, fights, and so on. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 00:57, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Interesting--clearly not all are in support of it, anywayHowever, now I'm curious:
 +
#Who qualifies as a "scholar"? 
 +
#Is Israeli academia as liberal as ours?
 +
#Why could they only find 100 people to sign this?
 +
Maybe I'm just being too suspicious, but they seem like legitimate questions which are not dealt with in this article. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:05, 8 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:We see this all the time in campaigns --> "''100 generals/pastors/businessmen/etc. sign letter in support for Trump/Hillary/etc.''" It makes you think that the candidate has the support of all pastors/generals/etc., but there are thousands -- at least -- of these people, so having 100 or less of them sign a letter is meaningless, other than the good-looking headline.
  
Apologies if I'm talking out of turn, but can something be done about this clown's endless supply of socks? Could a range block stop him? He seems only to have started this intense sockpuppetry recently, so perhaps one of the recently-lifted range bans was keeping him out? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 09:19, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Let's also remember that academics tend to be very far-left, even by Democrat Party standards. These scholars are probably more sympathetic to the Palestinians than they are to Israel.
:Range blocks strangled the project. What is needed, are sysops who not only know ''how'' to apply a block, but under what circumstances ''when'' to apply a block. Everything these blocking sysops have tried has categorically failed to block User:Horace, that much is abundantly clear. This particular case (one of several dozen) only highlights the need for serious reform and sysop accountability. The idea that sysops can rid Conservapedia of User:Horace by blocking him is like thinking a raise in the debt ceiling will bring about deficit reduction. How much more time should we waste with this idea that the banhammer, or range blocks, or lack of community standards and sysop accountability, is the answer to all our problems?  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 12:59, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::I know there are significantly less [[Atheism and women|atheist women]], but I would suggest that if Horace does not have a girlfriend/wife, he might consider trying to obtain one and [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|be less obsessed with Conservapedia.]] He might discover that women are far more interesting than rants against Conservapedia content. :) [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:57, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::The reason why Horace has started his intense sockpuppetry is that he has been banned from another wiki plus I refuse to read his emails. So he is extremely frustrated plus his infantile craving for attention is not being satisfied. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:57, 9 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::I must say I'm confused to see a sysop apparently helping this troll's socks... [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 13:02, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::A correction. Horace has been de-blocked at another wiki. I think it is a long shot that he will ever be allowed back here.  I think AmesG with his apparently declining leftist/progressive blog readership has a better chance,[http://siteanalytics.compete.com/acandidworld.com/][http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/acandidworld.com] but that will probably never happen too. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:28, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
===Blocking review===
+
:Let's not let these 100 academics distract from how much support there is from what President Trump did. Just earlier this year, the U.S. Senate ''unanimously'' called on Trump to move the embassy: [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/06/senate-calls-u-s-embassy-move-jerusalem-heralds-undivided-capital-israel/] Even Chuck Schumer wanted this, and he wanted Trump to declare Jerusalem as "undivided," as I mentioned above. The [[Zionist Organization of America]] is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the U.S., and it also supported the decision. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 15:32, 8 December 2017 (EST)
The active written policy currently states,
+
:''[http://conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Quick_reference#If_you_get_blocked the first thing you should do is review your communications with others here, particularly those who are admins];''
+
this can be a big problem, seeing the rampant archiving of active discussions, revision, deletion, and oversighting by admins trying to cover the tracks of their own policy violations. Here's a [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Aschlafly&diff=prev&oldid=894321 long list of abuses documented here]. Needless to say, the user is in fear for his life against reprisal simply for speaking up, which is all too common.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 16:06, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::I'd like to point out- without looking at the merits of Horace's case, of which I have made to attempt to discern, nor do I wish to do so- that with the '''Email this user''' feature now disabled appealing a block has become an impossible undertaking short of petitioning an administrator on another site or creating various sock-puppet accounts.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 17:30, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::The things about this individual are 1) he already has Andy's email, but he's got to bully his way back here, and 2), if he's so desperate to edit in a wiki, there are several hundred online for him to choose from...any wiki ''except'' this one.  Perhaps there's a wiki on cats that he could happily edit.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:38, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::You're still missing the point. Let's suppose a user, any user, is mistakenly blocked by a sysop as a vandal or sockpuppet. And let's suppose the sysop then reverts the blocked users edits, and let's suppose the sysop then archives active discussions the editor was in, and let's suppose the sysop then deletes talk page comments, and let's further suppose the sysop improperly oversights discussions the editor was in. What recourse would a good faith editor who has been unfairly blocked, or an advocate, have? These sort of sysop actions are entirely too prevelent on this website. [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 21:07, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::I was right; there is one[http://cats.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page], and at 248 pages it sure needs a lot of help!  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 17:41, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Could the reason why Horace and friends are so eager to edit this particular wiki is due to the [[atheism]] and [[evolution]] articles? If I am not mistaken, the Conservapedia evolution article was a big cause, if not the cause, for a whole new wiki to have been launched (which is a very obsessive wiki filled with obscenity). [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 19:16, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::What I meant is that in the future, blocked users won't have access to admins' email addresses.  Certainly this Horace fellow seems to be a jerk.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 20:13, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Main Page HTML ==
+
::Maybe I'm the only one who missed this little tidbit, but apparently since the The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, presidents have been '''''actively''''' delaying the project, by issuing 6-month wavers.  It is only now that Trump has again issued a waver, but ordered the project to begin. Presumably, this will be the last waver. [https://aclj.org/israel/recognition-of-jerusalem-as-israels-capital-and-decision-to-move-us-embassy-to-jerusalem-is-a-bold-and-welcome-move?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=d-12092017_top-O_seg-NLexNL20_typ-NL]  --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 12:36, 9 December 2017 (EST)
  
http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Main_Page&action=edit
+
== Please unlock ==
  
<pre><center><big>"'''[[Dow Jones|Dow]] off 500+ points" in another [[stock market]] crash below 11,000.''' [http://www.marketwatch.com/]</big></pre>
+
Hi, would you please unlock the following pages, so I can finish up some category clean-up?
 +
#[[:File:Steam locomotive.jpg]]
 +
#[[:File:Csx railroad.jpg]]
 +
#[[:File:Gallitzin rr.jpg]]
 +
Thank you!  It's not at all a high priority, but probably should be done at some point. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 13:25, 12 December 2017 (EST)
  
Can you please add <code><nowiki></center></nowiki></code> after <code><nowiki></big></nowiki></code>? [[User:Conservative]]'s talk page is protected and Special:EmailUser is disabled, so I can't teach him how to repair his mistake. Conservative accidentally placed <code><nowiki></center></nowiki></code> [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=899496&oldid=899495 before] (instead of after) <code><nowiki></big></nowiki></code>. --[[User:Michaeldsuarez|Michaeldsuarez]] 19:36, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Unlocked as requested.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:48, 12 December 2017 (EST)
:Conservative [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Main_Page&diff=899550&oldid=899496 fixed the problem]. If he or she is reading this: thank you. --[[User:Michaeldsuarez|Michaeldsuarez]] 21:30, 10 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== World History ==
+
::Thank you! I'm done with them, so they can be relocked now. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:43, 12 December 2017 (EST)
  
Hi Andy, just wondering when this will begin? I have signed up and keen crack on with it. Cheers! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:47, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
==Possible Mainpage Right Story==
:The signup thing says Sept. 1.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 20:13, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Doh! I should have looked! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 20:56, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Not sure if its MPR worthy but ==
+
Andy,
  
[http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/power-your-future/entrepreneurship-nothing-lose-everything-gain-183145165.html A pretty good success story for a entrepreneur who never even finished high school (He even calls out HS on the Jack of all trades it wants to make kids)]--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 22:09, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
I'm just wondering if this story should be added to mainpage right.
:Sure, if running pyramid schemes is considered honest work.  That's what his company, ViSalus, does.--[[User:CamilleT|CamilleT]] 22:16, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Election propaganda? ==
+
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/religious-schools-homeschoolers-to-get-a-boost-in-gop-tax-plan-thanks-to-ted-cruz-and-mike-pence/article/2643722
  
Hi! I was wondering if you thought it would be okay for me to create an article on propaganda in elections. I ask because I recently received some flyers in the mail from a political candidate that twisted the facts to portray the truth in a false light (for example, it referred to the tea party as anti-middle class even though it opposes taxes, and tried to show how the state democrats had improved the economy even though they actually did nothing productive while in control). I only worry that it could potentially overlap too much with another article that could exist that I haven't found.  
+
To summarize the story, 529 plans are college savings plans.  Parents can put money aside to help their kids pay for college, and get tax advantages  (Most states exempt money put into a 529 plan from income taxes,  for instance.  The tax bill, if it passes, will let the money be used for private elementary or secondary school tuition and homeschooling  expenses. I haven't seen this part of the bill get a lot of attention in the media,  and since Conservapedia was started as an encyclopedia for homeschoolers, and a lot of the users still homeschooler or are or were homeschoolers, thought that this might be worth including.--[[User:Whizkid|Whizkid]] ([[User talk:Whizkid|talk]]) 12:52, 18 December 2017 (EST)
 +
:For the record, not all homeschoolers support the bill, out of fear that it could lead to greater federal interference in homeschooling: [http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/12/09/homeschoolers-debate-federal-involvement-in-cruz-tax-bill-amendment/] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:54, 18 December 2017 (EST)
  
Sorry if I should be asking this somewhere else. Thanks!--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 22:40, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Americans say Merry Christmas ==
  
: I think that would be a fascinating new entry!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:21, 11 August 2011 (EDT)
+
According to this poll, Americans, whether they support or oppose Trump, prefer the term "Merry Christmas" over "Happy Holidays" (though the proportion for Trump supporters is higher than anti-Trump people).[https://www.axios.com/the-votes-are-in-merry-christmas-wins-2519396832.html] This might be something we could add to Mainpageright. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:15, 25 December 2017 (EST)
::Great! I'll do some more research into the topic, and then get to writing an article. Thanks!--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 01:41, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Sounds interesting, maybe I could add an international perspective? [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 01:43, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::Certainly.--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 17:54, 12 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
==Have you made a determination yet?==
+
:Terrific suggestion!  Posted.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:39, 25 December 2017 (EST)
Have you made a determination yet regarding the false slanders, and malicious smears directed against my person, character, and integrity? I would remind you, I, like yourself, edit under my real life identity. I'm sure you will agree with me about the unfairness of having your character impugned by anonymous internet trolls who hide behind ficticious user names.
+
  
In our private correspondence I stated I would respond at the Community Portal yesterday, however the page and its archives have suffered several vandal attacks just over the past 24-36 hours. I was blocked from responding to these baseless smears, then the blocking sysop reverted himself, unblocked me, left my IP blocked, and refused private contact which contradicts CP unblocking policy. I was severely inconvenienced for the whole day, and have been restricted from responding to these false allegations that I am a person lacking in integrity. And further, I've been insulted as a "dishonest fool", or some such.
+
== Yet more unlock requests ==
  
I'm not telling you how to run your website, sir. I'm simply asking for simple fairness, as someone who has proven himself trustworthy with sysop powers. Are you going to allow the attacks on my person and character to stand, or will you direct the parties who have over stepped the bounds of decency to apologize? Thank you for your attention.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 13:09, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hi Andy,<br />
 +
I'm working on some more category capitalization correction, but have a few protected images in the way of progress.  There is no hurry, but at some point would you please unlock the following images to I can fix their category references?
 +
*[[:File:Nash.gif]]
 +
*[[:File:A Solzhenitsyn.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:Ernest Hemingway.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:Ncgj688.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:RudyardKipling.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:Henryk Sienkiewicz.jpg ]]
 +
*[[:File:T S Eliot.jpg]]
 +
*[[:File:WilliamButlerYeats.jpg]]
 +
Thank you again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 14:05, 2 January 2018 (EST)
 +
:Unlocked as requested!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:29, 2 January 2018 (EST)
  
 +
::Thank you, I'm done with these, so they be protected again if you wish. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:07, 2 January 2018 (EST)
 +
:::Would you also please unlock the following images for the same reason?
 +
:::[[:File:MarianRejewski.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:MarieCurie.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:Nicholas copernicus.gif]]
 +
:::[[:File:GuglielmoMarconi.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:Nobel Jorn 111207.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:Al Gore VP portrait 1994.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:Charles dawes.jpg]]
 +
:::[[:File:Theodore roosevelt.jpg]]
 +
:::Again, there is no hurry. Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 11:52, 5 January 2018 (EST)
  
 +
::::Thank you! It seems that one of these did get missed, though, so would you please unlock [[:File:Nicholas copernicus.gif]]?
 +
::::Also, would you do the same for [[Miley Cyrus]] so I can fix a couple minor issues?
 +
::::Thanks again! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:21, 11 January 2018 (EST)
 +
:::::Conservative unlocked them. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 16:11, 11 January 2018 (EST)
 +
::::::So I see, thank you both!  I'm done with these pages now, so they can all be protected again, if needed. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:31, 11 January 2018 (EST)
  
=== Comments by other users and sysops ===
+
== Bad DACA bill ==
:Out of interest, Rob, do you intend to apologize for the slanders you've spread about me and your fellow sysops? [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 14:36, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::(a) Slanders? (b) diffs? (c) Is User:Jcw a real life identity?  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 14:43, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::I'm not going to link to obscene vandal sites here, but I'm sure you can work out which comments I'm talking about. Or do you stand by what you've said about me, Conservative, Karajou and others on that site? Even here on CP you've made disgustingly opprobrious comments: "18:30, 2 August 2011 RobSmith (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked TracyS (Talk | contribs) ‎ (blocking sysop insanity is not cause for blocking)", which as you well know is tame compared to what you've publicly said elsewhere. I don't like to bring this up; I wouldn't have said anything if it wasn't for what looks to me like an appalling double standard in your message above, but I really can't stand to see such bare-faced dishonesty. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 16:05, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::I inserted a break for this little conversation: it makes it easier for Andy Schlafly to address RobSmith's points without any distraction. [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 17:03, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Jcw: (a) show one diff here I said anything derogatory about yourself; (b) TracyS was blocked as "Sock of RobS", which of course, is insane. I stand by that comment.  And further, I am referring  to an fictitious user account (User:Karajou), who made a blatantly false aspersion on my person and character, User:RobSmith, who in real life is, Rob Smith. This fictitious user account, (User:Karajou) violates Conservapedia's own rules about user names. And this same unaccountable, fictitious user name (User:Karajou) has not only made false statements about a real life person ("Commandment 1. Everything you post must be true and verifiable"), he has blocked literally hundreds of user accounts for violating a rule ("Without transparency from users, there can be no accountability", Conservapedia:Guidelines) he himself has refused to abide by.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 17:38, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::As I say, I'm not going to post links to a vandal wiki here. You surely recall the comments you've made, and if you can't work out which ones are insulting that speaks volumes. As does your claim that a disagreement over blocking justifies calling a fellow sysop 'insane'. I really think you shouldn't have cast the first stone here. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 17:53, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::::To quote User:Conservative : ''Motion dismissed. I suggest you appeal your case to a Harvard Law School alumni. I don't think he will respond and he probably will refuse to hear your case. Conservative 17:38, 7 August 2011 (EDT) ''
+
:::::::What makes you think that Andy Schlafly will respond to you, Rob? [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 17:55, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::Jcw: So, you are unable to find one diff that I ever said anything offensive about yourself, thank you. Secondly, if you wish to hold blocking powers, I would encourage you to become familiar with Conservapedia site policy which states, "We do not ban users '''based on their comments elsewhere'''" [http://conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:How_Conservapedia_Differs_from_Wikipedia] Seems to me, you are bringing extraneous arguments. However, ignoring the rules, and making comments off-topic that run directly counter to Conservapedia's written rules, gets you off on the right foot.
+
:::::::::For the third time, I'm not going to post links to a vandal site here. I haven't been here long enough to pronounce on the nuances of site policy, but I can't believe that the Conservapedia Commandments are meant to allow sysops brazenly and publicly to insult their colleagues from the safety of a cesspit of trolls. However, you've made it quite clear that you're not prepared to retract those comments, so there's little point in continuing this discussion. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 18:34, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::::What are you saying? Your will, whims and prejudices trump Conservapedia site policy?  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:37, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::Ron: It has been my belief til now that Mr. Schlafly believes in accountability. When I entered the project more than 4 years, that was to be one large difference between Wikipedia and Conservapedia. Accountability is the basis of Conservapedia's username policy. Only in the past month I personally asked Mr. Schlalfy to consider revising Conservpadia's user name policy, yet his desire is to stand by requiring users to register with their real name.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 18:08, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Reply to the above ==
+
The "bipartisan" (aka. [[uniparty]]) DACA bill only provides for 10% of the wall and a 3% cut to chain migration: [https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/jan/11/lindsey-graham-dick-durbin-immigrant-deal-falls-sh/] This may be something to add to MPR, though it's obviously up to you. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:32, 11 January 2018 (EST)
  
No one is required to edit here using his real full nameIndeed, the user name policy here '''''discourages''''' the use of a real full name in setting up an account and editing. Those who choose to edit here using their real full name should expect possible criticism in public.  '''''The Constitution's First Amendment right to free speech protects that'''''.
+
:That is just terribleIf Trump approves that, I will be very disappointed. It's not surprising that a sellout like Lindsey Graham would help write something like this. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 22:35, 11 January 2018 (EST)
  
That said, if there is a specific comment that warrants extra-special attention, then please post it below with the link, and I'll review it.
+
::Also, on a slightly related topic, Tucker Carlson makes a very good point on Trump's s***hole comment: [https://twitter.com/TuckerCarlson/status/951581374535864320] --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 22:39, 11 January 2018 (EST)
  
Please keep in mind that the [[90/10 rule]] applies on this site to prevent unproductive discussions from interfering with the purpose of this site: to educate and learn in a productive way.  Thank you.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:48, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Thanks for the very interesting points. Looks like others want to post about other topics so we'll see what tomorrow brings on the above issues.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:05, 12 January 2018 (EST)
  
:(EC)Thanks for that timely reminder, Andy. It was a mistake to be drawn into this unproductive argument. As ever, Scripture is the answer, in this case Galatians 6:7. [[User:Jcw|Jcw]] 19:01, 14 August 2011 (EDT)  
+
Would you please unprotect the [[Joe Arpaio]] article so I can update it? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 10:15, 12 January 2018 (EST)
  
:This happens a lot: I'm afraid that you erroneously only read the first paragraph of Rob Smith's edit. Here is the second one, complete with all the things which warrant ''extra-special attention''
+
:Great suggestion!  Done as requested. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:39, 12 January 2018 (EST)
:''In our private correspondence I stated I would respond at the Community Portal yesterday, however the page and its archives have suffered several vandal attacks just over the past 24-36 hours. I was blocked from responding to these baseless smears, then the blocking sysop reverted himself, unblocked me, left my IP blocked, and refused private contact which contradicts CP unblocking policy. I was severely inconvenienced for the whole day, and have been restricted from responding to these false allegations that I am a person lacking in integrity. And further, I've been insulted as a "dishonest fool", or some such. ''
+
:Glad to be able to help -- [[User:RonLar|RonLar]] 18:56, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Well, you heard it from the boss, discussions on wiki sysop "accountability" are "unproductive". [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:07, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
:::No, "Ron", that does not include a link as requested.  In response to Rob, I am being productive in seeking to end the bickering.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:11, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Protected edit request ==
::::Well Andy, having a fictitious user account invent lies about me, block me for reverting vandalism, then revert himself, then unblock me but leaves the IP blocked, then ignore site policy by making himself inaccessible while he continues to post false information about me (another site rule violation), does not really point the finger at me as the source of bickering. I'm the victim here.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]] 19:18, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
:::::Rob, we respect freedom of speech here, and that includes being criticized.  If you don't want to be criticized, then don't speak out publicly.  But once you (or anyone else) speaks out publicly, then please respect the First Amendment right of others to criticize, and then move on to more productive activities.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:47, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Andy, would you please add<code><nowiki>{{See also|Liberal hypocrisy}}</nowiki></code> to the top of the protected [[Double standard]] article or at least add the link to "[[Liberal hypocrisy]]" to the former article's "See also" section at the bottom? I don't think you need to unprotect the article. --1990'sguy, 22:56, January 14, 2018
::::::Good. Let's not digress. Tell me why I was desysoped.  [[User:RobSmith|Rob Smith]]
+
:::::::Perhaps it was your habit of going to another website and insulting Conservapedia Sysops? Hardly behavior worthy of Sysopship--[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 20:12, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::::::::I don't know, sounds like what Rob did also falls under the First Amendment right, and even if THAT was the reason, I'm sure Rob would have liked to have been told that it was.  Regardless of what he may have done recently, for what he has contributed to this community in the past, he does deserve our respect. [[User:EyalLev |Eyal Lev]]
+
  
== Thanks ==
+
:I hate to keep pestering you with these, but in addition to the above request, would you please unlock [[:File:Potato-chips 275w.gif]] and [[:File:Gather Ye Rosebuds While Ye May.jpg]] and [[:File:Voyager.jpg]] so I can correct their categories?  Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 23:21, 19 January 2018 (EST)
 +
::In addition to DavidB4's requests above, have you been able to fix the image upload problem? --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:35, 20 January 2018 (EST)
 +
:::Andy, DavidB4's requests have not been done yet. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 18:17, 3 February 2018 (EST)
 +
::::Sorry for the oversight!  Done as requested.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 19:49, 3 February 2018 (EST)
  
Just noticed--thanks for moving Super Congress for me.--[[User:MorrisF|MorrisF]] 17:00, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Thank you! I'm done with them, so they can be locked again.  Would you also please unlock the following files for the same reason, so I can complete a request from 1990'sguy?
 +
:::::*[[:File:875997.jpg]]
 +
:::::*[[:File:Andrew carnegie.jpg]]
 +
:::::*[[:File:C-library.jpg]]
 +
:::::*[[:File:Britishpound-crash-soros.jpg]]
 +
:::::*[[:File:Edison and phonograph.jpg]]
 +
:::::*[[:File:Edison1925.jpg]]
 +
:::::Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 20:22, 3 February 2018 (EST)
  
==New Atheism and excess weight==
+
::::::Done as requested!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:49, 3 February 2018 (EST)
Could you unprotect the page on "New Atheism leadership's problems with excess weight"?  There's some valuable information on that page but some of it is awfully speculative and relies on circumstantial evidence.  I'd like to clean it up a bit.  Thanks! ---[[User:DennisRifkin|DennisR]] 19:00, 14 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
 +
Thank you, but I just discovered that [[:File:Edison and phonograph.jpg]] is still protected due to cascading protection from [[American History Lecture Eight]].  Would you mind temporally turning off that cascading protection also?  Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 10:22, 5 February 2018 (EST)
 +
:Done as requested, I think.  Please let me know if you have any additional issues.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:30, 5 February 2018 (EST)
  
==Hello Andy==
+
::Done, thanks!  You can re-apply protection now. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 12:43, 5 February 2018 (EST)
  
Please forgive me if this is the wrong place to post this, I'm not used to this site yet.
+
== Topic for "In The News" ==
I was searching YouTube and blogs today and stumbled upon an atheist blog site. I found one article where an atheist admitted that we SHOULD teach the evolution controversy. Is this common and ignorable? If you're interested I could share the link.
+
Dear Sir, were you aware that liberal artist Erykah Badu recently praised Adolph Hitler (specifically, his painting ability) in a recent interview this past week?  Did you hear any outcry from the liberal media over it?  I didn't think so, I only learned about it this morning when it was (briefly) mentioned in my local paper (The Dallas Morning News) within a weekly column. If you can discover more on this topic, I believe it would be a good addition to the "In The News" feature. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 10:24, 28 January 2018 (EST)
 +
:I heard something about this, but was unfamiliar with the artist. More information would be welcome.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:44, 28 January 2018 (EST)
  
Also, one of the atheists on the blogsite debated with Paul Taylor who cohosts Creation Today. Taylor did rather well and it's worth reading his arguements.
+
== NYU students react to Trump's state of the union address ==
  
If you want me to post the links I will do so.
+
Hi Andy, I don't want to distract from the above suggestion, but here is another thing which might be worth posting to MPR.  It's up to you, of course.<br />
 +
The open-minded students at another fine state university (NYU) have responded in firm opposition to Trump's state of the union address. Responses ranged from how racist it was, to how outrageous that it was used as a campaign tool.  There's only one problem...it hasn't even happened yet. Campus reform interviewed students, and here is a video on their findings: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0ByWdt5iFQ] and here is the full page on this: [https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=10442] --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 12:53, 29 January 2018 (EST)
  
--[[User:RedGoliath|RedGoliath]] 19:13, 15 August (GMT)
+
:Wonderful, posted as suggested.  (By the way, NYU is a private university, not a state one.)--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:02, 29 January 2018 (EST)
  
== Perhaps we should lock... ==
+
::Wait, how did I not know that it was private?  Huh, Ignorance abounds, I guess. Thanks for letting me know. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:05, 29 January 2018 (EST)
  
Perhaps we should temporarily lock the Dinosaur article until everything calms down? --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 21:28, 15 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Image copyright ==
:I concur.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 21:29, 15 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Nice idea, but they'll just find another article to mess with. --[[User:SharonW|SharonW]] 21:48, 15 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
== Request ==
+
Hello Andy, I would like to upload these two images, but the image licensing is confusing. Does the licensing permit me to upload the images, or not? They apparently are uncontested on the English Wikipedia. Here are the images: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hitlermusso2_edit.jpg][https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Benito_Mussolini_Roman_Salute.jpg]--[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 14:09, 30 January 2018 (EST)
  
Could I have SkipCaptcha rights? I know about the meritocracy thing and earning it, but it would make it '''soo''' much easier to revert some vandalism if i didn't have to type in a captcha every time a link is restored :/ --[[User:SeanS|SeanS]] 14:24, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
+
: They are OK to upload here as "[[fair use]] and probably [[public domain]]."--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 21:13, 30 January 2018 (EST)
  
: Done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:24, 16 August 2011 (EDT)
 
  
== EditCount Extension Request ==
+
== Are you ready for some football?  Half of all Americans are not ==
  
Hello Mr. Schlafly. I see you haven't responded to my previous comment (you are a busy man of course!) Anyway...I'm requesting that you install [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Editcount EditCount] for MediaWiki PHP software download. This will help me and others better keep track of their 90/10 standing. Anyway...back to articles for me. Godspeed! --[[User:WilliamMoran|WilliamMoran]] 00:17, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Andy, I wasn't sure if you saw the latest NBC/WSJ poll that said that 51% of Americans "don't follow football closely", up nine points in the past four years. Also, 48% of Americans said that if they had a child who wanted to play football, they'd encourage them to play another sport instead, which is up 8 points from 4 years ago. Here's an article about the poll, with a link to the actual poll in the article.
  
== Email ==
+
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-parents-would-discourage-football-due-concussions-n843836?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma
  
Thanks for the extra rights. In case of any problems following blocks, I now feel I should be contactable by email, but I can't see where in my preferences to add my email address. (I thought I already had it in there, but again, I can't see it.)
+
--[[User:Whizkid|Whizkid]] ([[User talk:Whizkid|talk]]) 11:49, 4 February 2018 (EST)
 +
:Wonderful news story. I've posted it. Thank you.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 12:30, 4 February 2018 (EST)
  
Can you point me in the right direction? Thanks--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 10:44, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== MPR typo ==
  
: No problem and no need for email, because someone will let you know on your talk page if your blocks are overzealous or too long.  You can see prior blocks by others to get the idea. 1 year blocks in duration are becoming the standard for vandals; short blocks for non-vandals are appropriate. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 10:57, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hi,<br />
 +
There is a typo in the "MPR" news section.  I [[Talk:Main_Page#MPR_typo|mentioned in on the talk page]], but I guess it got lost in the noise. Several entries down, there is one which starts "Why did the Dems boo and his at Donald Trump...", but "his" should be "hiss". It might be a little late to fix it now, but perhaps it is better late than never. --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 12:47, 5 February 2018 (EST)
  
::OK, that seems simple enough. Thanks for the quick reply.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 11:02, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
==Inconsistency between In the News and Unplug the NFL articles==
:::One further point on this while I think of it. The screen that a user sees when blocked does suggest that they email the user who blocked them. This should be removed if it isn't standard policy.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 07:28, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
+
On the In the News article it says that all the Philadelphia Eagles players stood for the anthem the entire season.  However, on the Unplug the NFL entry it mentions the Eagles as a team that had at least one player protesting the anthem this year (and that had a reference).  They can't both be right, and I don't know which one is, so please research and fix the error.  Thank you.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 20:51, 7 February 2018 (EST)
 +
:Revised the headline. Thanks for catching this!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 21:44, 7 February 2018 (EST)
 +
::Thank you. [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 11:13, 8 February 2018 (EST)
  
== The Conservapedia  Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun ==
+
==Possible news article--Gag Order on Prof over Great Barrier Reef issue==
 +
Outside of Fox News (and this was solely an opinion piece) how much are you hearing about whether the famed Great Barrier Reef is or isn't really dying?  This might be a consideration for In The News.
  
The Conservapedia  Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings have begun and can be found [[Conservapedia:Blocking policy refinement panel proceedings|HERE]]. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 12:18, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/08/science-or-silence-my-battle-to-question-doomsayers-about-great-barrier-reef.html
  
==Andy's desperate need for minions==
+
[[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 15:16, 8 February 2018 (EST)
  
Hey, Andy, do you need a minion? Read [http://philip.greenspun.com/samantha/samantha-III here] about one MIT professor and the frightening tactics he suffered (read all the way to the end). --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 17:26, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Ah yes, another open-minded college which refuses to accept alternative viewpoints.  This is definitely not a new controversy. The fact of the matter is that no, it is not dying. Like everything else in the world, it may be changing, but this is natural.  I did a quick web search and pulled another result at random with a similar message: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/25/alan-jones-launches-great-barrier-reef-site-after-criticising-global-warming-hoax
 +
:One fact is certain: Global warming is becoming a real, dramatic problem in a few places, most of all on Mars, where the temperatures have been skyrocketing for years. This must be due to all of the martians driving SUVs and using aerosols.... --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 15:46, 8 February 2018 (EST)
  
:Oh, wait, he was talking about a "[[minyan]]". My bad. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 18:15, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
+
==Listened to Senator Rand Paul last night==
 +
For a few hours, at least. The voice of one crying in the wilderness.
  
== Social insects ==
+
Based on the speeches I heard I have not one area of disagreement.  And as a FedGov employee (your friendly DoD civilian leech at "work") I'm affected by these things (especially as a supervisor since I have to send out early morning messages as to what my team should do).  The House did its job and passed all 12 appropriations bills (argue as you will their content, but at least they did their job)--the Senate has yet to take up one.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 09:20, 9 February 2018 (EST)
  
Hello there,
+
:I've also worked for the government, in the past.  Not sure I would say that the "House did its job" by continuing its reckless deficit spending.  But I appreciate your insights!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 11:43, 9 February 2018 (EST)
  
I just reverted your edit to the social insect example in Counterexamples to evolution, but I thought I better explain myself because it IS your encyclopedia! I expanded this example yesterday and moved it to the Irreducible Complexity section, where it seems to fit better. I hope that was OK?
+
::Maybe not how we would do things if we were there, but at least they sent something over. If the Senate were really that concerned about deficit spending they could amend the bills then discuss in conference.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 08:27, 15 February 2018 (EST)
  
: That is an improvement in placement for that insight.  Well done!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:49, 17 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Unlock request ==
  
== Thanks! ==
+
Would you please temporarily unlock [[Template:Christianity]]? I would like to fix a typo and add/fix a few links. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:42, 13 February 2018 (EST)
  
...for deleting the latest vandal's userpage.  I hated just leaving it sitting there.  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 10:43, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done as requested!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:14, 14 February 2018 (EST)
  
== Liberal bias in the media ==
+
::I made the changes/fixes -- you can lock the template again. Thanks! --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 11:09, 14 February 2018 (EST)
  
[http://www.journalism.org/numbers_report/are_media_ignoring_ron_paul I think this proves it.] This'll be good for the main page. [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 18:14, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Thanks for edit on Young Mass Murderers ==
 +
I wasn't able to find anything on the block you completed (because, of course, the lamestream media has their agenda to push--in this case their hatred of military officer training). [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 08:30, 15 February 2018 (EST)
  
== Farewell ==
+
== Request to unlock Deism page ==
 +
This page has been locked for nearly a decade now.  At least one other person has requested an unlock there in order to add some references and clear "citation needed" tags.  Plus it needs some format cleanup.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 08:30, 15 February 2018 (EST)
  
Andy, I'd like to thank you for the many many acts of kindness and helpfulness during my stay here.  [[User:SamHB|SamHB]] 23:13, 18 August 2011 (EDT)
+
==Error in In The News==
:Farewell, SamHB.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 09:49, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
+
It's a grammatical one, don't worry.  "That, despite the fact that The Shape of Water was the the highest-grossing Best Picture winner in five years."  You have the word "the" inadvertently repeated.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 21:36, 5 March 2018 (EST)
 +
:Great catch.  The error actually came from the quote/link.  It is corrected now.  Appreciate it.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 00:13, 6 March 2018 (EST)
  
== 2 Economics Questions ==
+
==Comment on Peyton Manning Article==
 +
Good way to tell only part of the story.  The article says that Papa John's sold their stake in the joint venture as well.  I know you dislike Peyton (maybe seeing him on every Sunday NFL commercial wore you out) but at least tell the WHOLE story.  [[User:Quidam65|Quidam65]] ([[User talk:Quidam65|talk]]) 21:25, 7 March 2018 (EST)
 +
:Appreciate the feedback, but I don't watch NFL football so I don't see Manning's ads.  He's been criticized on this site as overhyped by the [[liberal media]] for a long time.  I infer from the article that Papa John's sold their stake because Manning bailed out.  He's always been weakest when needed most, and he shouldn't have allowed himself to be used as part of the NFL's scheme to push [[Tim Tebow]] out.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 15:21, 8 March 2018 (EST)
  
Anybody can of course answer but I thought Id ask on here since Andy teaches on the subject.
+
== Delete or unlock request ==
  
1: When the government just prints money to pay for things like what the Obama admin. has done in the past, theory states that the dollar will go down in value. I assume that this is akin to supply/demand for products but... products are tangible things that can or cannot be bought/shipped etc. whereas it seems money, while tangible, isn't a commodity that is bought and sold. Who takes a look at how much total money is circulating or what market factors play into currency being devalued when there is a lot of it. How do you go from printing a lot of money to the entire currency being devalued due to it.
+
Hello,<br />
 +
we have an empty category [[:Category:Internet crime]] which is a duplicate of [[:Category:Internet Crime]]. The former one is not in use, and has the wrong capitalization. Would you please either delete [[:Category:Internet crime]], or unlock it so I can?  Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 14:34, 10 March 2018 (EST)
  
2: When people talk about raising taxes to make up for the deficit I hear detractors saying that this would hurt investment/productivity because now there is suddenly less incentive to do so since the government is taking more of it away from you. I am not talking about business taxes but more personal income since I do think taxing business is directly bad but... if for example someone who made $15,100,000 net, now suddenly has to pay another $100,000 in taxes why does that translate into less investment? Perhaps I am interpreting some peoples words wrong but is it that people no longer have the same desire to make money now that they are getting less of it or is it that it is more risky to invest since they do not have as much money in case something doesn't pan out? I guess I am interpreting some talking heads as saying, "well people wont work as hard for that 15 mil next year if they have to pay higher taxes". My answer would be that if I am getting 15 mil a year and have to pay another 100k I'm still getting around 15 mil and would be more than happy to work the same amount next year for something very similar.
+
== Is this accurate? ==
  
Thanks for any help.
+
I posted this edit on the Talk page for [[God]] http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:God#Abrahamic_religion
[[User:Ameda|ameda]] 17:57, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Am I accurately describing CP's POV?
  
== A couple of things ==
+
:Your statement is a reasonable one, although I would emphasize we remove [[liberal bias]] rather than have a POV of our own.  I did promote your account to skip Captcha.  Stick around!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:44, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
  
Good evening, Mr. Schlafly. I just wanted to ask a couple of things:
+
== Thoughts on Princeton gun incident today ==
 
+
About the World History course, how is it decided one is basic or honors? I see the terminology used in the Study Guide, which I have added quite a few entries to.
+
 
+
About ''[[The O'Reilly Factor]]'', it currently redirects to [[Bill O'Reilly]]. I was wanting to work on an article on the show perhaps in a week or so, and just wanted to make sure it was okay.
+
 
+
About a request I and another editor made to you a while back that is still above, have you processed these yet? If not, OK. I just didn't think you saw it due to the chaos lately.
+
 
+
Lastly, there a sizeable number of articles in the speedy delete category, including a few possibly libelious entries that need to be deleted.
+
 
+
Thank you and enjoy the rest of your evening.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 22:08, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
: Thanks for editing the [[World History Study Guide to 1648]] -- the basic and honors categories are simply to prioritize terms so that the most trivial are not given equal priority with the most important.  The honors terms would be expected to appear on a CLEP or AP exam, but not so much on high-school level tests.
+
 
+
: It's been a busy week and unfortunately I have not been able to review your request for more privileges yet.
+
 
+
: You can edit [[The O'Reilly Factor]] now, and I've removed may of the speedy deletes.  Thanks for alerting me to this.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:07, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thanks for explaining that to me, and for opening the article for editing. I will produce an article on the show soon. Review my request when you get the chance, whenever; I'm a fairly busy man myself and I understand. But thanks!!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 23:16, 19 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Good news: the basics for the guide are complete! Can't wait for the actual course though! Good evening.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 19:53, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Thanks! ==
+
 
+
Hi Andy, I hope you are having a good weekend. Thank you for reinstating me, I am enjoying once again contributing to Conservapedia. So far I have only made a few minor edits and have written an essay (my first ever): [http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:_Everyday_Heroes Essay:Everyday Heroes]. Please feel free to let me know if you have any feedback or suggestions, I am always open to constructive criticism and would like to know any way my contributions can be improved. Thanks again, - [[User:Taj|Taj]] 16:24, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
: It's a fabulous essay - I'll put a link on the front page so more people can be inspired by it!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:17, 20 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Suggestion: Sunday editing... ==
+
  
 
Hi Andy,
 
Hi Andy,
  
As I'm currently recovering from medical problems and unable to drive, I found myself at home during what I suspect are church hours for most of the regular editors here.  I couldn't help but notice a substantial number of vandals and parodists cropping up during those hours, and I suspect it's not a coincidence.  It seems likely that they're anticipating a chance to do damage while the project's stalwart defenders are off at church.
+
I was curious about your thoughts on the [https://www.princeton.edu/news/2018/03/20/princeton-police-surrounded-armed-man-nassau-street-restaurant incident involving a gun at the Panera Bread on Nassau Street in Princeton].  Fortunately, I was not in that area of Princeton today. [[User:GregG|GregG]] ([[User talk:GregG|talk]]) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
 
+
:You should really ask Panera Bread about that instead of us. After all, Panera Bread made it official back in 2014 that no guns were allowed on the premises. Surely, the gunman in this incident was aware of that policy[https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/5784464]. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
Might it be a good idea to disable account creation for those few hours on Sunday morning, just to avoid such attacks?  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 11:07, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Greg, always good to hear from you.  I guess this incident had nothing to do with the school, unless the perpetrator was a student.  The school is on spring break.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 23:36, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
:Perhaps, but we'll let Mr. Schlafly decide. I just would also like to point out, though I attend church on Sundays, some people may worship on Saturdays, and some good-faith editors may decide not to worship. But, I guess, disabling it for a few hours wouldn't hinder much.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:17, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::There was also in the news a Maryland high school shooting in which two students were wounded before the shooter was shot and killed by armed security. The liberal media will barely touch both because it goes against their agenda, and part of that agenda was to make both school and Panera "gun free zones", as if they believe the bad guys can read and heed. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] ([[User talk:Karajou|talk]]) 01:42, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
 
+
::It could definitely be an inconvenience for some editors, and it's a shame that it even needs to be considered.  I don't know if it's the right answer or not, which is why I'm suggesting it to wiser heads than mine for consideration. --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 14:28, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Yes, it would. I personally don't think that is the answer.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 14:53, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
::::Thanks for your alert effort this morning, Ben, and your thoughtful suggestionHowever, I don't think a systematic change is needed based on few isolated instances of vandalism. James, by the way, the temporary change Ben suggested would not affect accounts already created.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 14:59, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::::Oh. Thanks.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 15:00, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
::::::Okay, I'm more than willing to acknowledge I may be overreacting. Thanks, Andy!  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 15:08, 21 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Another [[Elvis Presley]] Image ==
+
 
+
Since you deleted the existing images for the article due to the source link being dead, I thought of another image that could be used instead. [http://www.fotopedia.com/items/flickr-3645268666 This one of him in the Army] I believe the copyright is okay, as I searched for free use images, but just wanted to make sure as there was a problem with a set I requested before in a similar manner. Thanks much!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 09:03, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
:I'm not convinced that picture is usable.  Could it be a photo of a photo?  It looks unusually blurry to me, and the attribution ("Elvis Presley Memorabilia at the Privately Elvis Museu") makes me question it further.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:41, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::You're right; after looking at it, the photo most certainly could be a photo of a photo and is probably too blurry for an encyclopedia. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Elvis_Presley_68_Comeback_Special.jpg Here's one of the 1968 Comeback Special]. Thanks much!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 07:03, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Notability ==
+
 
+
Excuse me again, but I'm not sure if [[Bob Bruce]] is notable enough for an encyclopedia. I ran his name through a search engine and didn't find anything from any prominent sources. And the author said he copied it himself from [[Wikipedia]], but the article appears to be deleted. Your thoughts? Thanks!--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 21:51, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Likewise for [[J. T. Alley]].  [[User:WesleyS|WesleyS]][[User Talk:WesleyS|<sup>Hello!</sup>]] 21:57, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
::"Notability" can be a tool for [[censorship]]. There are many important [[conservatives]] who lack entries on [[Wikipedia]], while many obscure and unimportant entries remain there.  ''Conservapedia'' doesn't want to make a similar mistake.
+
 
+
::The two examples cited above are informative.  Ordinary people are worth learning about too.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:37, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:::Many thanks for clearing that up. I agree with that principle.--[[User:JamesWilson|JamesWilson]] 22:39, 22 August 2011 (EDT)
+
 
+
== Deletion and merging ==
+
 
+
Hi Andy, this page: [[Hubble redshift]] is almost a duplicate of [[redshift]]. I want am going to copy the relevant parts out but how do I delete [[hubble redshift]] when I have done that? Do you have to do it? Thanks and I hope the rattle you got didn't frighten :-) We get them all the time down here! [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 19:12, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
:Done. Thanks for the suggestion.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:04, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Username change. ==
  
== [[User:ThePuppyTurtle]] ==
+
Hello, would it possible to change my name from my current one to a new one called Winston Smith? Thanks.
  
This recently blocked user, who spammed a link to another website, had a record of blocking as seen here http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=User%3AThePuppyTurtle&type=block
+
:How about a change to WinstonSm?  Full names are disfavored without verification.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 17:14, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
 +
::I'm highly suspicious that either supposed name given by this user is the user's real name, especially since these are well known literary characters.  [[User:GregG|GregG]] ([[User talk:GregG|talk]]) 18:02, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
 +
:::Either way, the user that wrote the request created that account only a few hours ago and only made two edits, both of them being requests to change the username. It's ridiculous to create a new account and immediately ask for a name change without doing anything else. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 19:39, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
 +
::::Great points.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 20:02, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
  
Why is it that two senior sysops, Karajou and Conservative, unblocked this user after "user request" and because "he frequents the shockofgod chatroom"? Do you think is is worthy of investigation? I post here because their talk pages are locked. [[User:WLambert|WLambert]] 23:06, 23 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== New Essay ==
  
== Another duplicate article ==
+
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Great_Conservative_Media_Hated_by_Liberal_Critics
  
Hi Andy, [[Cosmological_redshift|this is another duplicate article]] which needs deleting. I have asked the user, JimJast, if he could please add relevant information to the article on [[redshift]] instead of creating more and more articles describing the exact same thing. Thanks in advance, [[User:MaxFletcher|MaxFletcher]] 17:09, 24 August 2011 (EDT)
+
I'd like to see this essay get some promotion and contributors. You may think it's redundant in light of the other "Greatest Conservative..." essays on this site. But like the description says, it's not only meant to highlight great conservative media, but also how much that conservative media gets an undeserved negative reputation since most critics are liberal. I've been dismayed by the underwhelming and lackluster response my other essay got:
  
== Counterexamples to evolution ==
+
http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Virtue:_Christian_vs_secular
  
I was blocked last week by DouglasA for some of the edits I made to the "Counterexamples to evolution" article. IDuan has just unblocked me on condition that I don't edit that article. Is this a reasonable condition to impose or is it fine with you if I join the discussion on improving the article? I see that JMairs has started putting a bit of work into it; I agree with some of what he wants to do and disagree with other bits, and with your permission I'd like to see what I can contribute. Thanks for your time. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 13:09, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
+
It only got two other editors, despite the fact that it's an essay that could go a long way towards countering the negative reputation that Christians have in the secular world.
  
: Your comments on the talk page are certainly welcome at this time!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 16:41, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Misspelling/redlink on Popular Articles ==
  
::OK, thanks for that. I see you're having a discussion there with JMairs at the moment and like anyone else I'd like to nudge it in my own favoured direction as much as possible! --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 16:53, 25 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Hi.
  
== Scott debate ==
+
There's a misspelling on one of the links included in the section Popular Articles on the main page, and by extension, a redlink that needs addressing: Specifically, one of the links says [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Essay:Greatest_Consrvative_Movies&action=edit&redlink=1 Essay:Greatest Consrvative Movies]. It should say [[Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies]]. [[User:Pokeria1|Pokeria1]] ([[User talk:Pokeria1|talk]]) 18:09, 28 March 2018 (EDT)
  
Good morning!
+
:Great catch! Corrected it.  Thanks!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 18:57, 28 March 2018 (EDT)
  
I was hoping to listen to this debate, but unfortunately, was unable to do so. Do you know if it's online anywhere, for those of us who missed the original airing?  Regards,
+
==Reduce protection==
--[[User:Benp|Benp]] 11:24, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
+
Please reduce the protection level of [[Template:USPresidents]] to a mid-level permission.(such as users who have upload or block permission perhaps) [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 21:46, 1 April 2018 (EDT)
  
:The "Listen here" link works on the Main Page.  Here it is also for your convenience: [http://english.ruvr.ru/2011/08/24/55100138.html].--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 11:49, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
+
:Done as requested!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] ([[User talk:Aschlafly|talk]]) 14:57, 2 April 2018 (EDT)
  
::Not sure how I overlooked that.  Thanks!  --[[User:Benp|Benp]] 12:57, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== MPR request (2) ==
  
== Dawkins and Watson ==
+
Hello Andy, would you please add a link to [[Sadiq Khan]] (London's mayor) to the MPR blurb about London's murder rate? Khan is a left-wing Fabian Socialist, and his politically correct policies (as I showed in his article) have directly led to the increasing murder rate in London. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 00:45, 7 April 2018 (EDT)
  
Is there any chance that I could be allowed to edit the Richard Dawkins article? I'm working on a new article detailing the "Elevatorgate" issue between Dawkins and Rebecca Watson of Skepchick/SGU, and I think it would be helpful to put a brief summary of it in the main Dawkins article. Thanks. --[[User:SamCoulter|SamCoulter]] 18:25, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== A Question for Mr. Schlafly ==
  
== Hope ==
+
Dear Mr. Schlafly,
 +
I find your site fascinating. One question I have -- and I pose it not in the spirit of argumentation / beginning an argument, but rather to receive an explanation from your point of view. Much of the material in the gospels could be interpreted as Christ urging people to take care of the poor. There are moments in the New Testament during which Christ suggests that accumulated wealth on earth will not be favorably looked upon in the next life (Matt. 19); during which Christ tells his disciples to sell their possessions and give all they have to the poor (Matt. 19); and so forth. Also, in Acts 4, it is suggested that Christ's apostles share possessions in common, and to a certain degree one might interpret that the failure to do so could have negative consequences (Acts 5: 1-5). In any event, I would very much appreciate reading your thoughts on this matter, if you have the opportunity to respond.
 +
Thank you very much for your time,
 +
D. C. [[User:Questions]], 17:41, 8 April 2018
  
I read a hurricane might hit where you live. I pray you and yours will be safe. [[User:Aortuso|Aortuso]] 21:50, 26 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Very important news story for 2018 ==
  
== Deletion and merging  ==
+
Andy, please see [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Main_Page&diff=1413268&oldid=1413238 my post on the main talk page].  The Hungarian election that just happened is one of the most important events of this year -- [[Viktor Orbán]] is the face of Europe conservatives who are fighting for national sovereignty and less immigration, and he won a massive victory, exceeding even his own party's expectations -- and '''literally''' the only issues he focused on were immigration and national sovereignty. This is a big victory for conservatives both in the U.S. and Europe, and a big defeat for globalism and the EU.
  
On the advice of MaxFletcher I merged some of my stuff with other essays/articles and as a result some articles should be deleted. The articles ready for deletion are:
+
Orbán was the only European leader to endorse Trump in 2016, and the year before that, he built a wall on Hungary's southern border which cut illegal immigration by over 99%. This story should be added to MPR -- if we're going to add multiple stories in a row about minor events in the UK, we definitely should add the most important victory for conservatives in Europe this year. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 23:34, 8 April 2018 (EDT)
#Demystified gravitation (moved to essay)
+
#Einstein's universe (merged)
+
#Einsteininan gravitation (merged)
+
#Essay:Einsteininan gravitation (merged). [[User:JimJast|JimJast]] 17:15, 27 August 2011 (EDT)
+
  
: I'm happy to delete them, but don't want to make a mistake.  Could you empty them first so I know that I'm deleting the right ones?  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:35, 27 August 2011 (EDT)
+
== Another unlock request ==
  
== Suggestion - vandalism ==
+
Hello, not to distract from the above posts, but when you get a chance, would you please unlock [[Famous American writers]], so I can edit change the category? Thank you! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 09:43, 9 April 2018 (EDT)
 +
:In addition to DavidB4's request right above, please unlock the page [[Sonia Sotomayor]], so I can fix the categories there. --[[User:1990&#39;sguy|1990&#39;sguy]] ([[User talk:1990&#39;sguy|talk]]) 11:35, 9 April 2018 (EDT)
  
Why not screen usernames by pre-approving signups? Many of the trolls have non-human usernames. -[[User:Danq|danq]] 22:52, 27 August 2011 (EDT)
+
::Thank for unlocking those!
 +
::There are also some pages which should be deleted at some point, as general maintenance, but are protected. Would you please either delete them yourself, or unlock them so I can do this?
 +
::*[[Talk:AronRa]] (broken redirect)
 +
::*[[Essay: An irreligious person with a degree of obsession with the User: Conservative account]] (broken redirect)
 +
::*[[:File:Mohammed karikatur.jpg]] (unused duplicate of File:Karikatur 7.jpg)
 +
::*[[:File:1500balt.jpg]] (unused duplicate of File:1500BALT.JPG)
 +
::Thanks! --[[User:DavidB4|<font color="ForestGreen">David B</font>]] <sup>([[User talk:DavidB4|TALK]])</sup> 16:24, 19 April 2018 (EDT)

Latest revision as of 15:24, 19 April 2018

Comment here

Archive Index

Contents


You archived way too much!

Please restore everything from "Is this article appropriate to cite?" onward. That material, particularly the last few sections, was extremely relevant to ongoing issues, especially discussions that I was involved in and want to comment on further. SamHB (talk) 19:15, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

Time to move on to other issues here, Sam. The world doesn't stop spinning to await resolution of endless debate about something. You can copy the debate from the archive and move it to the talk page for the relevant entry, but I encourage you to let it go and address new issues instead.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:19, 19 August 2017 (EDT)

Thank you for the page move of Eclipse. JDano (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

Move requests

Andy, would you please move these two articles and their corresponding talk pages:

--1990'sguy (talk) 16:27, 20 August 2017 (EDT)

Andy, would you please move these articles? --1990'sguy (talk) 17:40, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
Done as requested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:52, 21 August 2017 (EDT)
Andy, would you please move British Sri Lanakn Tamil to British Sri Lankan Tamil without leaving a redirect to fix a spelling error? --1990'sguy (talk) 09:27, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
Done as requested, thanks again.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:59, 23 August 2017 (EDT)

Andy, would you please move The Secure the Fence Act of 2006 to Secure Fence Act of 2006? The first "the" is unnecessary, and the second "the" is not in the law's name (it is a typo). Also, when you move the article, please move the article name on these four articles: [1] --1990'sguy (talk) 23:29, 29 August 2017 (EDT)

Delete request

Andy, would you please delete Category:Solar Power, an unnecessary and empty category? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:35, 21 August 2017 (EDT)

Done.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2017 (EDT)

Would you please delete these two redirect categories:

--1990'sguy (talk) 00:05, 2 September 2017 (EDT)

Andy would you please take care of these requests? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:33, 2 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, in addition to the above requests, please delete Category:Roman emperors. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:44, 3 September 2017 (EDT)
Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:16, 3 September 2017 (EDT)

Another fight

Would you please delete Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump. This article is just JDano's version of what the Mainstream media and Donald Trump article should be (here is the difference between JDano's version and the actual version, which I think inserts irrelevant information such as polling data and the TIME magazine cover, and all the information altogether inserts a liberal bias into the article). In the essay's intro, JDano attacks me, saying that "Until August 2017, a group of editors worked hard to develop an encyclopedia article on this topic, but then one editor decided unilaterally to delete materials that did not agree with his personal opinions" The information that I deleted, like I said, had a left-wing bias in it, and I was working hard with this article long before 2017 (in fact, I was the main editor of that article, so JDano is effectively praising and attacking me). --1990'sguy (talk) 16:09, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

The Essay does not mention any individual editor, and the article was started by User:Firestarter. I am open to feedback about the essay, but I believe it does a better job of exploring the tension between Donald Trump and the mainstream media. Some of the sources that 1990sguy has deleted were in fact mainstream media sources, but I believe it is necessary to refer to the mainstream media in the process of discussing the relationship between Donald Trump and the mainstream media. Other information was added to the essay to better explore some of the items raised in the current Mainstream media and Donald Trump article, including MS-13 and a false reporting of 2014 rape at the University of Virginia. The problem is that some of the writing in the article is not clear, and 1990sguy has resisted attempts to make the text more closely reflect the sources. I have generally stepped back from editing the current Mainstream media and Donald Trump article, but I believe a more accurate portrait of the current situation can be found in the essay. Perhaps interested readers will consider both. The essay contains 1990sguy's account of Charlottesville rather than what I had originially wrote, but as an essay, I will have the opporunity to revise it over time. The fact that 1990sguy wrote directly to you, rather than discuss the essay with me, shows how he is unwilling to collaborate with other editors. Many thanks, JDano (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
1) You did not name names at the top of your essay, but you are obviously criticizing me. You do this often.
2) Yes, Firestarter created the article, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I created most of the content. You are ignoring this and falsely implying that I did not make substantial edits to the article until a week ago.
3) You are unilaterally changing the article's tone and theme, and you are adding irrelevant content that gives the article a liberal pov tilt. I linked your edits, and I will do it again: [2] A some of your changes are meaningless (if it ain't broke, don't fix it), irrelevant (polling data, TIME Magazine cover), and a lot of it accepts the MSM's narrative of certain incidents (the Pheonix rally section). Honestly, I don't see why any good-faith person in their right mind would add the info that you did. Is approval rating data really relevant to the MSM and Trump? --1990'sguy (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
I am willing to discuss these three issues with you, but the place for that is on the essay talk page or my talk page. Thank you. JDano (talk) 18:23, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
Your edits are ridiculous. You think that a TIME magazine cover and approval rating data are somehow important to the article. They give the article a left-of-center tilt. Also, I have tried discussing things with you. I did it all the time with you, and I was actually better at going to the talk pages than you. However, many discussions with you (and other editors and you) show that you are unwilling to budge, to reconsider, or to meet in the middle. I have accepted many of your edits, even as I reverted some others (and I am referring to changes in single diffs and articles). Knowing your personality and the contents of your edits, I see no good reason to start an (almost literally) endless discussion with you that wastes over half the time I have to made any edits on CP whatsoever. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

Ignoring all the main argument, I also see two other factors. First, this is an "essay," which usually means conflicting points of view can be published. Second, to make this article, JDano copied the work of others into an essay which would presumably have been written solely by him. --David B (TALK) 19:47, 4 September 2017 (EDT)

I think that the headnote makes that clear, but I will add a statement to the talk page giving attribution. Thanks, JDano (talk) 19:52, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
We do not delete essays, no matter how much we disagree with them, unless they are libelous. That's been the rule here for as long as I can remember. The point of an essay is that one can express one's personal point of view, not subject to being reverted or otherwise hounded. The essay category is full of such things.
But I would recommend that JDano request that its name be changed from just the name of another article with "Essay:" in front of it. If I wanted to write yet another essay on the same topic I'd have a difficult time. That's why I named my recently created essay "Essay:Pussy Riot - an Anti-Putin Perspective". SamHB (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
In addition to the name of the essay, my problem with his essay is that he attacks me with false claims. I already mentioned this above, but at the top of his essay, JDano writes "Until August 2017, a group of editors worked hard to develop an encyclopedia article on this topic, but then one editor decided unilaterally to delete materials that did not agree with his personal opinions." That statement is bogus -- most of the article is MY WORK, and I edited the article long before August 2017. JDano is blatantly violating Conservapedia Commandment #1, the same commandment he claims to support. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:54, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
Also, as I said quite a lot today, the reason why I removed the info was that they were terrible edits. They inserted liberal bias because they focused on irrelevant topics such as approval rating polls and TIME magazine covers (along with blindly accepting the MSM's narrative on the Pheonix rally and Charlottesville) rather than focusing on the actual topic. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:58, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
I am addressing this concerns on the essay talk page where it belongs. 1990sguy has been misusing this page. JDano (talk) 22:48, 4 September 2017 (EDT)
As an encyclopedia, it would inappropriate to criticize other editors, either individually or as a group, in an entry or essay. On a talk page that would be fine, but not in an entry. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:53, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
I don't think that is what prompted 1990sguy to start this section and request the deletion, but I will reword the headnote. You should be aware that the encyclopedia article was a collaborative effort until 1990sguy started to block users with whom he had disagreements in late August 2017. Thanks, JDano (talk) 08:04, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, would you please rename the essay so it is not just the actual article's name with the word "essay"? What about Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump - JDano's perspective? --1990'sguy (talk) 08:41, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
I would recommend a name that doesn't have JDano's name on it. After all, my "Essay:Pussy Riot - an Anti-Putin Perspective" article doesn't have my name on it. Perhaps use the phrase "an alternative perspective", or "a non-conservative-media perspective", or "a contrarian perspective". I could think of a few edgier names too, but we don't want to get too inflammatory. SamHB (talk) 12:05, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, would you please make on of these page moves? --1990'sguy (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
It appears that 1990sguy is continuing to pick fights. First, I want to make clear that other editors are welcomed to continue adding material to Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump, and that the essay represents more than just my personal opinions. It also appears that User:1990sguy has a very unencyclopedic view of Mainstream media and Donald Trump -- rather than explain the difficult relationship between the two, he wants just a list of times that the mainstream media has show bias against or disapproval of Donald Trump or his actions. I don't think that his vision for the article fits with our policy of "Tolerance of opposing ideas means that we're not afraid of describing ideas we don't believe in. If you'll follow our editorial guidelines, then there's no idea off limits. Just write an article which explains what the idea is, who believes in it, and the reasons they give for it." Therefore, I propose a compromise:
This will allow 1990sguy to have a clear label for the list he wants to currate and will allow all interested editors to add content regarding an important topic -- the relationship of Donald Trump and the mainstream media. Many thanks! JDano (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
That's not a good "compromise." It's just a way to get your version in the mainspace, and following your suggestion will create two articles with mostly duplicate information. These are the changes that JDano wants to incorporate into the article. Apparently, he thinks it's necessary to discuss negative approval rating data in this article, for example. Andy, please judge those edits for yourself, and please most JDano's essay to a more appropriate name, as I and SamHB said above (and if I and SamHB both agree on something, it shows it's noncontroversial change). --1990'sguy (talk) 18:45, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
Actually, 1990'sguy and me agreeing on something is not all that noteworthy. We would disagree strongly on issues of creationism, for example, if we were ever to get in a conflict over it, but we don't. And his attitude toward Breitbart news seems to me to be appalling, but I haven't looked into the issues enough to want to get involved with that. But these issues of content are, in my opinion, trivial. His positions don't bother me at all. I think we might be able get along just fine.
We also disagree on one matter of policy—whether he should have absolute power to block me any time he wants. But Andy has decided that issue in his favor, so there's nothing I can do about it. In fact, I stopped editing CP for a week when I decided it was no longer safe for me to be here. But JDano came back and survived, so maybe 1990'sguy intends not to exercise arbitrary and absolute power, which I think is a good sign.
But there are several issues of policy that 1990'sguy and I seem to agree on, based on what he said about creating an "essay" page for JDano's writing about MSM and DT:
  • Non-libelous material is never removed from any talk pages, user pages or otherwise, nor are such pages ever deleted.
  • Non-libelous material is never removed from any user pages, nor are such pages ever deleted.
  • Essays are never subject to edit-warring. As much as one may disagree with the content of an essay, it's an essay. One can complain on the talk page, but, ultimately, the author(s) control the content.
Now I think it's unseemly for the content of the MSM+DT main page and JDano's essay to involve complaints about the writing quality of the other. By the way, I'm not going to get involved in that issue. I would need to study both pages in detail, which I don't have time for, and, in any case, it's outside of my area of expertise. However much 1990'sguy and JDano may despise each other's writing, they should each concentrate on making their own article the best it can be. And refrain from attacking each other. Except possibly in talk pages, if you must.
One thing JDano should do is pick an appropriate title for his essay, that appropriately describes its role as a "reply" or "rebuttal" to the main article. Then the essay can be restored and set to that name. Moving pages is a difficult operation, so it would be good to have to move it only once.
SamHB (talk) 21:22, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
(edit conflict) The problem is that if a topic is an encyclopedia article - it must be written in an encyclopedic tone explaining all sides. We are trying to write an encyclopedia article and you keep taking out relevant material claiming that it is not pro-Trump. The relationship between the President and the media is a very important topic. If a reader looks at both he will come away with a better understanding from Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump than from the bias fragments that have been slapped together in Mainstream media and Donald Trump, so I do not agree with your proposal to rename and I think that my suggested renaming is a better fit to Conservapedia's policies. If the essay is renamed, I will delete the italic headnote. Thanks, JDano (talk) 19:08, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
Passing off what the MSM says as fact does not give a reader a better understanding on this topic. Nor does including polling data. I notice that, for some reason, all the information that you add related to Trump is negative -- please show me a diff where you added information that portrayed Trump in a positive light; I found quite a lot of the opposite as I showed with the diffs I linked here and elsewhere. This article accurately shows the relationship between Trump and the media as it is, and let me remind you that we are a conservative encyclopedia -- we don't blindly accept the MSM's narrative of various topics as you did. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
(edit conflict) I agree that we should not pass off what the MSM says as fact, but we can cite to the MSM coverage when a critic claims that the MSM failed to cover something. We should discuss this on the essay talk page, and not change the subject again. Thanks, JDano (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
By the way, the relationship between the MSM and Trump is that the former strongly opposes the latter. Trump is not criticizing the MSM because he really wants to -- he's doing it in response to their bias against him. Trump is a New Yorker who once was a more liberal Democrat. If he's now the MSM's #1 opponent, that says something about their reporting.
JDano's favored article unduly favors the MSM's reporting. The diff I linked above shows this, along with this edit, where he delegitimizes the conservative media's critique of the MSM. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
You are free to raise these concerns on the essay's talk page, this is not the proper place. The phrase "conservative media" is hard to define. Some of it like Fox News is mainstream media. If you want to start a Conservative media and Donald Trump article, we can discuss that complicated relationship as well. We are not here to legitimate or condemn anyone. We just make the article follow the sources without exaggeeration. That is true whether the source agrees with the CP editor or not. Where in the current Mainstream media and Donald Trump do you explain how Trump's strategy has brought things to the current state and whether his media strategy is successful? JDano (talk) 19:08, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
First off, as my previous experiences discussing with you proved worthless as you would consistently refuse to budge, I don't have much interest discussing with you -- it will just lead to an endless discussion. In the past, I was actually more consistent in going to the talk page than you were -- look at the talk pages, including your own. Remember the "female genital mutilation" dispute? It only ended after you were blocked, and you accused me ridiculous and terrible things just because I took the same position that every other editor eventually took along with me. Also, I didn't come here to discuss with you -- I came here to ask Andy to take care of your essay, in which you personally attacked me and made blatantly false claims. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
(edit conflict) There are established procedures for proposing a page move that allow other people to comment on it. It is done on the essay talk page. There are procedures to discuss content concerns. Again, go to the essay talk page. If you disagree with an editor, you should try to work things out. From the last comment above, you appear to be emotionally involved and upset, so you should not block people with whom you have such feelings. Being a good Christian neighbor, I thought that by creating two different pages, I am trying to avoid future conflicts. Yet, by repeatedly running to Andy's talk page, you are trying to engender and escalate differences. Thanks, JDano (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

JDano, if you want the keep Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump from being deleted, you are going to have to make it 80% different from Mainstream media and Donald Trump in terms of its wording, content and pictures. You have 4 weeks to do this or it will be deleted.

19990sguy, I would focus now on either making the article better or making related articles such as Donald Trump and Fox News or Donald Trump and CNN or Donald Trump and conservative news media or Donald Trump and Breitbart or Donald Trump and Jim Acosta or Donald Trump and Twitter. Conservative (talk) 20:24, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

I believe that there is now an 80% difference between the two pages. I have been working on it all day. I no longer am able to upload pictures. Thanks, JDano (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
I have access to a tool which says your essay is "78% percentage similar to" the other page. So you are not even close to doing a proper revision according to this tool (and no I am going to share with you more information about this tool. I will share this tool with 1990sguy though so he can evaluate your efforts in an objective way). Please use different sources, wording and pictures. Website visitors don't very similar content and that is why your essay will be deleted unless you do a very substantial revision. Conservative (talk) 20:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
The whole idea is to take the same sources and put them into context. Please read both right now. You can judge as to which version treats the sources fairly. To my knowledge, there has never been a requirement that essays and articles use different pictures or sources. I want other editors (including 1990sguy) to feel free to contribute additional points to the essay or to both the essay and the article (and they should not have to worry about how different their contribution makes the two). May I suggest that you move the Essay back until we can decide what is the best way forward? Many thanks, JDano (talk) 22:32, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
I think Conservative's idea is good. You added information that I think is bad to add to a mainspace article on this topic, so you can keep that in your essay. However, the articles should be different, and an essay is not to supplement -- not replace -- mainspace articles. Until that is achieved, it is appropriate for the essay to be a sub-page of your account. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:37, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

JDano, in the past, I wasted time trying to reason with you on talk pages. I am not going to do that anymore. I deleted your essay.

I did have a confidential talk with 1990sguy about things he could do to improve as an editor. But no matter what improvements he makes, I think that ultimately he will have trouble with you if you persist in pushing an anti-Trump agenda in areas where Trump is being reasonable. Trump is obviously not infallible though and all presidents make mistakes.Conservative (talk) 23:59, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

P.S. This wiki isn't ModerateRepublicanpedia.com nor is it NeverTrumppedia.com Conservative (talk) 00:12, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
I don't view this as anything to do with Trump. I think it has to do with a failure to read the sources and to present the sources in a balanced way. I don't care whether the underlying fact makes Trump look bad or good, everyone must avoid stretching sources to support what we hope they say rather than what they actually say. I am a conservative first and foremost, but I am also a dedicated encyclopedia writer. I was active here before Trump rose to his leadership position, and I plan to be here after he is gone. In some cases, I pick a topic and write an article, in other cases like the TAR cleanup effort, you ask me to do the work. Cons, you properly decided the Conservapedia should have a Mainstream media and Donald Trump article (rather than Mainstream media's war on Trump), and I tried to fill out topic based upon how the sources informed me. I had hoped that creating a separate essay would end the problem, but 1990sguy loves to run here to stir up unnecessary drama. If Andy wants to preserve the right of editors to write essays, he knows where this essay is located (as a deleted user subpage). Many thanks, JDano (talk) 00:20, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Readers don't want substantially duplicate content from other websites posted at Conservapedia nor do they want substantially duplicate articles at Conservapedia. I have zero regrets about deleting that essay. Conservative (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
I agree that Conservapedia does not need two articles, but what is there now is a mess with no flow and footnotes that do not support the text. The article says that the Mainstream media failed to report this or that, and yet there are plenty of MSM sources showing the coverage. Cons, as a skilled researcher, perhaps you could clean it up. Thanks, JDano (talk) 00:51, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
An opportunity opened up for me to pursue. I am not going to investigate your claims and I doubt anyone else will either. One or more of your past edit comments and other matters has created a situation where you have few allies. Conservative (talk) 02:58, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
It is not a question of allies. It is a question of Conservapedia's standards and reliability. I can understand if two people have a sincere difference of opinion (for example Editor A supports Trump for the Republican nomination and Editor B supports Ted Cruz). Both editors should respect each others views, but make sure that articles are not slanted for one candidate or the other. I also understand a live and let live attitude toward people curating lists, like Donald Trump achievements if there is clear criteria for what belongs on that list. I don't understand how a topic sentence like "The relationship between the Mainstream media and Donald Trump has been problematic." has drawn so much ire and edit warring. I challenge anyone here to write a better sentence that uses the phrase Mainstream media and Donald Trump that is encyclopedic and accurate and to put it in as the first sentence of the article. We all agree on the facts (that there is bad chemistry between President Trump and the media), we can't agree on how to apply Conservapedia's standards to produce an article. Further, with Cons' unfortunate action late last night, we no longer agree that editors can write essays or have subpages on their user page. JDano (talk) 08:29, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Your edits in this case (like so many others) were bad. Yes, they did give the article a left-of-center (or RINO) tilt, and they relied exclusively on the MSM, but in this case, they also were irrelevant to the article. Polling numbers in response to the Charlottesville incident are irrelevant to Trump and the media. It is true that sometimes you catch errors in things I write (I have made this very clear in my previous comments, and I often change a lot of my info due to your criticisms). However, you always do more than catch errors -- you insert biased information as well. I revert the bias while keeping the improvements, but you want it to be all or nothing (for all the articles, D.T. achievements, fake news, travel ban, constitutional carry, etc.). I have no regrets that your essay was deleted -- you were given the chance to make it different from the mainspace article, and you still protested anyway. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Dear 1990sguy, you have the chronology wrong. The essay was deleted and moved to a user subpage after I spent all day making it different from the article and before I was offered 4 weeks to make it further different. Some people have expressed doubt about this "objective tool" which measures the differences between pages. Could you please shed some light on what is it and what criteria that it applies? Many thanks! JDano (talk) 09:22, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Conservative moved the essay after checking your article and finding that it was still 78% the same, as the talk page comments attest. Seeing your edits to the essay before it was deleted, this is a reasonable number, as there were many sections that you didn't even touch. I will not reveal something that he does not want me to reveal, but I will assure that it is real and accurate and that I would use it honestly and objectively if given the chance. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:33, 6 September 2017 (EDT)

I restored User:JDano/Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump.

But I am absolutely not going to wrangle with you about the necessity of you making the essay 80% different from the aforementioned article.Conservative (talk) 21:45, 6 September 2017 (EDT)

Conservative, why did you restore the essay? --1990'sguy (talk) 21:47, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Cons, many thanks, JDano (talk) 21:59, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Conservative, why did you restore it? Does the criteria to make it 80% different still apply? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
I think it's pretty obvious. He had made an ill-considered decision to delete something, in violation of Conservapedia customs, and he reconsidered. People rethink their decisions, and correct bad decisions, all the time. Cons has done this before—he once deleted my user and talk pages. SamHB (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2017 (EDT)

It is in his userspace. If he doesn't make it 80% different in 30 days, it will be deleted. I restored it to give him a chance at making it 80% different. He is going to have radically change the text, sources/footnoting and pictures for him to make it under the 80% different threshold for his essay.Conservative (talk) 22:40, 6 September 2017 (EDT)

Thank you. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:40, 6 September 2017 (EDT)
Again, this discussion does not belong on this page. 1990sguy, why do you conduct all of your communications here instead of relevant talk pages? JDano (talk) 10:56, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
Why are you doing nothing to move the discussion somewhere else? You are posting here, SamHB is posting here, Conservative is posting here (and I just replied to Conservative's comment that he restored the essay), but you only focus on me. If your behavior persists, I may have to take action against you again. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:11, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
Because the page where it naturally belongs was, for a while, deleted. People need to know that the pages on which they are discussing things won't suddenly disappear. I feel sorry for Andy having to have this on his personal talk page, but, until this issue gets straightened out, it needs to be here.
@1990's guy: Your last sentence above sounds like a threat. Contributors to web sites that are trying to appear professional, and that have "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia" in their masthead, shouldn't do that.
@JDano: It's obvious that things you have written in your essay anger 1990'sguy a great deal. While he needs to deal with his anger, please do what you can to keep your essay from saying things that would anger reasonable people.
@1990's guy: Many things here at CP anger me greatly: the Conservative Bible Project, the Counterexamples to Relativity, the Counterexamples to an Old Earth, the Biblical Scientific Foreknowledge page, to name just a few. We have to deal with those things. We respect diverse opinions, as a wiki like this should. But I agree that personal attacks should not be present in any pages anywhere.
@Cons: If you really think that some kind of objective technical "tool" to compare pages would be a useful thing, why don't you send it to all of us? You know my email, of course. There are actually a few things I would like to analyze objectively with such a tool.
@Cons: To show your patience, why don't you increase the 30 day limit to 66 days? With the added detail that they must be 66 consecutive days that you keep your promise not to edit Conservapedia, as described at the bottom of my talk page? The clock starts now, or, more precisely, at 10:49, 7 September.
SamHB (talk) 15:13, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
Of course there are things I don't like, but I wish JDano would act in a manner similar to you or DavidB4. He should know by now that his POV is not conservative (or, if you insist, like the conservatism supported by CP, a conservative encyclopedia) and would accordingly be more cautious in his edits. However, he continues making sneaky edits (making canned edit summaries that don't say what he is actually doing) inserting liberal bias and/or favoring the MSM over the conservative media, like on the Barack Obama article,[3][4] Constitutional Carry (calling it a "propaganda term", etc.), D.T. achievements, fake news (taking away blame of the MSM), gun control, etc. He then gets into edit fights over the content (before I started coming here, I was actually better than him at going to either his talk page or the article talk page, and sometimes he would not respond to my comments). Sometimes, he makes ridiculous personal attacks[5] (apparently, thinking that FGM is a predominantly Muslim practice either makes you a parodist or someone trying to legalize the practice -- CP's other editors disagree). If you want to know why I'm angry at JDano, I hope this helps. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:01, 7 September 2017 (EDT)

SamHB, I will follow your suggestions regarding the 66 days. JDano has 66 days now.

Please remember that the 66 day period is a period during which you do not edit Conservapedia. The clock starts when you stop. As of now, that means that the clock started at 08:42 on 9 September.
After today, I am going to refrain from writing anything that will tempt Cons to edit here. Further communication will be by email, where we can discuss things freely, without either of us being tempted to engage in "grandstanding". But first, I need you to send me the "objective comparison tool" that you referred to above, and for which you provided a screen shot below. So please bear with me for a little bit longer while I argue with you publicly, below. SamHB (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)

Second, THIS ARTICLE convinced me that Europe very stubborn and very much engaging in denialism as far as Islam. If this continues, within 2-4 generations Islamic/evangelical creationism could easily kill off evolutionism in Britain, France and Germany. In 4-6 generations, creationists could kill off evolutionism in Europe. On top of this, evangelical Christianity is growing by leaps and bounds in China. You know you can't satisfactorily answer the 15 questions for evolutionists. Its time you stop clinging to your lost causes of evolutionism and old earthism. Conservative (talk)

Ummmm, I was puzzled at first that you were inserting material about evangelical creationism right here in the middle of the dispute between 1990'sguy and Jdano over an essay relating to Donald Trump. But then I realized that it was another swipe at me and my acceptance of evolution, bizarrely placed in the middle of this discussion. With a reference to a "15 questions" item on a creationist web site.
Cons, we've been through this many many times before. I do not accept articles from creationist/fundamentalist religious sources as being authoritative about scientific discussions. But I figured I'd humor you and at least look at the page this one time. The page says, right at the top, that "The General Theory of Evolution, as acknowledged by prominent evolutionists, includes the origin of life." No, that is not true. Prominent scientists (or even those that are not prominent) do not acknowledge any such idea. I stopped reading right there. SamHB (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
1990sguy, JDano is liberal on some issues. Liberals always double down. People who are liberal on certain issues often double down on those issues. Sooner or later you are going to have to block JDano for longer and longer periods. He is not going to change otherwise. Conservative (talk) 17:10, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
Dear Cons, I am conservative on most issues, and libertarian on others. The reason why you do not understand my personal political opinions is that I take my work at Conservapedia very seriously as an obligation to the high-school level readers that we are trying to serve. Conservapedia commandment #5 is "Do not post personal opinion on an encyclopedia entry." So I do not, and I also delete it when I see that others have posted opinions -- whether I agree or disagree with it. Let's move this discussion to the proper talk page please. JDano (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
Whether you're conservative or not, your edits strongly suggest otherwise. Also, if you're going to accuse me of posting personal opinion, I cite everything, oftentimes with multiple references -- it's not my personal opinion. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
I don't know where you get the idea that there are skeptics about the existence of this tool, or the idea that it is mysterious. The only mystery is why you haven't mailed it, or a download URL, to me. Now it's true that JDano wrote, above, that "Some people have expressed doubt about this "objective tool" which measures the differences between pages." I don't know who he thinks those "some people" are. I haven't seen any doubt expressed anywhere at Conservapedia.
As I'm sure you know, comparing files is tricky. The theoretical research ("Hamming distance", for example) is useless here. Textual comparison tools are an important part of software Integrated Development Environments (IDE's), or even environments that aren't integrated, as in the Emacs "three-way-merge" operation. The wikimedia software that is used to compare versions of files in the file history here at CP (which is how we got into this fight in the first place) is surprisingly quirky, even though the problem it is trying to solve is much easier. As an example, compare the 10:38, 9 September 2017 and 10:44, 9 September 2017 versions of the Equifax article. Did it really consider the files to be different in just 5 pairs of wikilink brackets, or in 4 pairs plus a complete paragraph? It makes a big difference—that paragraph is the bulk of the article.
So I'd really like to get this tool and try it out on various files, both here at CP and elsewhere. I might even add it to my set of software development utilities. So please send it to me by email. Then I will stop tempting you to get involved in this discussion and thereby breaking your promise. SamHB (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2017 (EDT)
OK, I found it. Google the quoted phrase "secret magic tool to measure the degree to which articles are different", and you will see an expression of skepticism about the existence of this tool, apparently expressed 3 days ago. On everyone's favorite web site. SamHB (talk) 13:12, 9 September 2017 (EDT)

JDano, if you want the keep User:JDano/Essay:Mainstream media and Donald Trump from being deleted and have it be made into an essay, you are going to have to make it 80% different from Mainstream media and Donald Trump. I suggests making changes in terms of its wording, footnotes/sources and pictures.Conservative (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2017 (EDT)

IP blocking for "servers allowing spam"

Hi,
I have some lists of "servers allowing spam" (I'll refrain from using the proper name for these servers for the sake of those who may not know) from some other off-site administration duties. I see some other Admins and Assistant SysOps have been blocking such IPs, but I wasn't sure if as an assistant SysOp, I have the authority to do that. Would you like me to implement such blocks, or shall I refrain, or perhaps just send you the lists for you to check before blocking? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 21:04, 22 August 2017 (EDT)

Perhaps it would be best if you sent me the list first. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:16, 22 August 2017 (EDT)
Okay, I'll need to sort it first, but will try to send you some of them soon. At this point what I have is "dirty data" so maybe I will clean up some of them (a "sample") and send those, and if you want more afterwards, I'll keep going. Cheers! --David B (TALK) 23:22, 22 August 2017 (EDT)
I've sent a partial list. I'll put a hold on further extraction pending you reply. I literally have hundreds, and probably thousands, most of which do not seem to be blocked on CP. However, for better or worse there are no IP ranges, only specific addresses. --David B (TALK) 00:19, 23 August 2017 (EDT)
Do you happen to know if any specific countries' addresses are used against us more than others?
As I'm sure you have seen, I have started blocking the addresses I have. This really is just the tip of the iceberg, though--I have many thousands more. I feel funny blocking so many, but most are overseas anyway, so I suppose there is no harm. --David B (TALK) 16:13, 24 August 2017 (EDT)
You're doing great work. As to which countries, China and Singapore might be a bit worse than most. But that's just a guess.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:47, 24 August 2017 (EDT)
Thank you! I may pay a little more attention to those locations then, but if you don't know of any specific trends, I won't make a special effort to focus on any. It sounds like you don't mind, so I'll keep going. Do I assume correctly there is no method here to block multiple addresses at once? I'm starting to figure out the scope of how long processing all of these addresses will be. I just "scraped" addresses from one service alone, and got about 49,000 addresses in all. I can't deal with that kind of quantity manually, even if I do run out of addresses of my own. If not, that's okay--I'll just do some of what I have, and stop with that. --David B (TALK) 00:27, 25 August 2017 (EDT)
That's great, David. Thank you!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:26, 25 August 2017 (EDT)

Explicit rescinding of longstanding policy

The material that is being discussed here is archived and available in this section and the sections that follow.

That policy is, of course, that "assistant sysops" are not permitted to block users over content disputes, only for obvious vandalism. I have brought this up a number of times; I won't repeat it here.

Andy has explicitly, on four occasions, given 1990'sguy permission to block people over content. And 1990's guy has wielded that power twice.

1990'sguy seemed reluctant to do this, since JDano also (at that time) had blocking authority. As though he will only take action against weaker parties.
I called him out on that here.
I objected here.
  • Andy threatens a block over content, but does not delegate that authority to 1990'sguy here.
  • 1990'sguy acknowledges his power here.
  • A fourth time here.

And then 1990's guy suddenly wants to archive the whole thing, putting it out of sight. Which Andy did. This strikes me as suspicious.

This policy makes it impossible for me to work here. Another assistant has already improperly wielded block authority against me because of my contention, in the Pussy Riot article, that one does not need to be an "elitist" or "leftist" to oppose murderous thug Vladimir Putin.

SamHB (talk) 01:08, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Once again, SamHB, you conveniently ignore that you were blocked for attempting to impose a liberal POV on that article and for edit warring (both in violation of Conservapedia policy) and for trying to provoke fights, as you're doing even now with your thinly-veiled shot at me. You brought that, and your other previous blocks, down on yourself through your history of behavior here, and trying to claim "improper" use of block authority to excuse and dismiss your behavior here does not make your case. Follow the rules of the site instead of fighting them (and those who actually follow them) and you'll be a lot better off for it. Northwest (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
SamHB, there is nothing "suspicious" about me wanting to archive everything -- the talk page had nearly 300,000 bytes, and it took very long to scroll down to the bottom. Also, I did not specify which discussions to archive -- I would not have argued if Andy kept the disputes with JDano (but now their archived, so you're just duplicating the discussions by re-adding them here, Sam).
Sam, JDano's editing style is the one that makes it impossible to work here, not to mention the fact that many of his edits have inserted left-of-center POV (such as calling constitutional carry a "propaganda term", etc.). I have been extremely reluctant to use any blocking authority on him regardless -- SamHB, if there were misconduct on my part, it wouldn't be because I am acting the way I do now. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
(edit conflict) The problem is that our rules about blocking cannot depend on whether the content is thought to be liberal or conservative. All an angry person with blocking authority needs to do is to define "conservative" as content I prefer and "liberal" as content the other person prefers. If two people have an editing dispute, they should try to work it out. If one or both of the people have blocking authority, they should not use it because they are too emotionally involved. In the long term, we need to build a colleagial working environment, and blocking the person with whom you disagree destroys that environment. Thanks, JDano (talk) 09:29, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
"I would not have argued if Andy kept the disputes with JDano"? Really? You would have been OK with those disputes staying? And yet, when I put them back you deleted them? And you would like me to believe that Andy's archiving the page was his own idea, though he archived it 38 minutes after you requested it? And you claim (in an edit comment) that "SamHB, you explicitly refused to comment on them at first."? I commented on these issues all along. SamHB (talk) 10:06, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
Sam, you're duplicating discussions. They are now in the archives and on this talk page. They should be only on one or the other. Archiving the talk page obviously was not Andy's idea, as I suggested it. However, Andy was the one who did it -- he obviously thought it was a good idea. I did not tell him to archive everything, just that the vast majority could be archived. --1990'sguy (talk) 10:09, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
You're right. The material has plenty of links into it in the paragraphs above. What you requested was that Andy "archive the discussions on your talk page", without suggesting any limit. If you would have been OK with his archiving only older material, you wouldn't have objected to my "correcting" things, would you? SamHB (talk) 10:56, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
Only if you don't duplicate the discussions -- frankly, it is sloppy editing to do otherwise. At the same time, I do have to say, that the discussions are over. There is no more dispute for any of them, and I don't want to be forced back into wasting 50% of my available time arguing over stuff that I thought were resolved weeks/months ago. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
Besides, Sam, why are you now so concerned about having this information back on the actual talk page? You explicitly refused to comment on the disputes earlier: [6] --1990'sguy (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2017 (EDT)
I withdrew my offer to contribute when you made it clear, as you have done on a number of occasions, to me and others, that you view people's contributions as "acceptable" or "unacceptable", placing yourself as the arbiter of what can be said on this wiki. SamHB (talk) 10:56, 26 August 2017 (EDT)

Deletion of GinnyS's user and talk page

Please restore the talk page of user GinnyS. (I don't specifically care about her user page.) She was recently blocked for objectionable behavior, and, much as I wish that hadn't happened, it did. But her talk page had quite a bit of advice from me to her as a new user. I advised her against precisely the things that she did. Her talk page should stay up as an example of how to behave and how not to behave. It could be useful to future people. In any case, it is never necessary to delete user pages of people who have left.

I have been trying to encourage Cons to refrain from useless activity on CP (see my talk page), and he admits that he has a problem in this area. I think it would be useful to show that actions such as his deletion of Ginny's page are not productive. SamHB (talk) 23:36, 27 August 2017 (EDT)

Hello,
The issue of legal trademark reuse continues to confuse me. I recently created an article on Kaspersky Lab following the buzz about their potential connections to the Kremlin. I was looking into whether it would be permitted to use their logo on that page, and cannot find a definitive answer. As usual, Wikipedia (and Wikimenda commons) says that while a trademark, the logs are not copyrightable and therefore can be used basically in any way they wish. I can't find much on the matter on Kaspersky's own website, but just two official "blog" posts with their logo in two different sizes, clearly for reuse. [7] (older one here: [8]). I would also be fine with just the "K" logo: [9]
What do you think? Would it be alright for us to use one such logo on the page about them? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 13:42, 31 August 2017 (EDT)

David, good question. It would be "fair use" to use their logo as part of an entry about them. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:47, 5 September 2017 (EDT)
Thanks! I've added a low-resolution version of it to the article. --David B (TALK) 09:52, 5 September 2017 (EDT)

User:1990sguy

User:1990sguy is again following me around and acting in a hostile and intimidating manner. He falsely claimed that I copied material from an article he wrote, which I denied "swearing on a Bible", and he called me a liar. He is being unnecessarily disruptive to my effort to write a full comprehensive and unbiased article on Donald Trump and social media. I would appreciate your help on this matter. Many thanks, JDano (talk) 18:01, 8 September 2017 (EDT)

One: Since when was removing liberal/establishment/MSM bias a bad thing? You're the one who is adding the bias and denying reality: contrary to your edits, the establishment IS a real, commonly-used, and objective term (and it has its own CP article), John McCain and Linsey Graham ARE RINOs (just look at their positions and voting records), and the WH staffers who oppose Trump's tweeting ARE on the moderate wing. Stop denying reality and giving articles MSM spin (the MSM makes Graham and McCain appear to be conservative, for example).
Two: Please read Donald Trump achievements: Media and political correctness#Trump's establishment of a massive direct line to the public via social media. JDano clearly copied a lot of that section into the other article. You can tell because he uses a lot of the same wording, uses the same references, and he even formats the references MY way, which is a lot different than how he usually formats them as he uses the "cite web" ref template. BTW, I never said that it was a bad thing to copy from that article -- I just noted that it happened. I don't disapprove of his copying in this case, as it did not violate any copyright. JDano, if you really did not copy from that article, please prove to me that you did not. Everything in that action of the D.T. achievements sub-article is very-similar-to-identical to the Donald Trump and social media article where you transferred it.
Three: Wow, JDano, you constantly criticize me for going to Andy's talk page, and now you're doing the same thing. You are not following your own ethical standards. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:13, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
As I previously disclosed on the article talk page, it was copied from Donald Trump, and I have not read the article that you mentioned above. You continue to insult and harrass me for no good purpose. You call me a liar without any basis. This is all very toxic. JDano (talk) 22:19, 8 September 2017 (EDT)
Please show me in which sections of the Donald Trump article you took the info. I already gave the specific link, Donald Trump achievements: Media and political correctness#Trump's establishment of a massive direct line to the public via social media, where the info is essentially the same. Where in the Donald Trump article is info duplicated? I see no evidence that you took the info from the Donald Trump article, so I would appreciate it if you would show where you got it.
In all honesty, your behavior in the 9 months has also played a large role in the toxicness. If you think that I'm only the one to blame, you're wrong, by a lot. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:38, 8 September 2017 (EDT)

Request

Andy, would you please add Category:Breitbart to the protected image, File:Breitbartlogo.jpg? --1990'sguy (talk) 23:36, 10 September 2017 (EDT)

Done. Conservative (talk)

MainPageRight request

Andy, would you please add the 99% drop in illegal immigration in Hungary since building its border fence to Template:Mainpageright? --1990'sguy (talk) 18:06, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Excellent suggestion! Posting now ....--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:02, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
Thanks for adding. Would you please add a link to "border fence"? --1990'sguy (talk) 19:34, 16 September 2017 (EDT)
Great suggestion. Done!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:57, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Camelid Category change

Hi,
I've been holding off from this project because it requires some protected page edits. However, I decided to go ahead and try to get it done. Category:Camelid should not exist, since it is the singular rather than plural. Would you please do the following?

  1. Change the category on Template:Nb_zl_camelids to Category:Camelids
  2. Unlock Camelid
  3. Delete Category:Camelid to prevent future confusion

Thank you! --David B (TALK) 20:24, 18 September 2017 (EDT)

Also, would you please delete Bill of Attainder since I completed the merge with Bill of attainder, and that first page is not needed? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 21:14, 18 September 2017 (EDT)

Vandalism delete request

Please delete the article "Dildo", which was created by a vandal (unless someone else does it first). I cannot add the speedy deletion tag to it because my university's server is not letting me access the page due to the inappropriate title. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:18, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

I tend to find excessive locking a significany inconvenience, but I highly doubt there will be any legitimate need to create an article under that name. Should we just lock it? This is the third creation of a page under that name by vandals. --David B (TALK) 00:57, 20 September 2017 (EDT)
We could also protect some of the other pages that vandal created, as at least some of them were created before. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:58, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

Another Mainpageright blurb

In addition to Hungary's successful border wall, not a single illegal immigrant entered Israel's border with Egypt for the past 12 months due to the border barrier there. I recommend adding this story to Template:Mainpageright. Hungary and Israel are the two main modern success stories with regard to border security.--1990'sguy (talk) 10:48, 20 September 2017 (EDT)

In addition to my request above, please delete this page: Talk:User Abranch. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:00, 21 September 2017 (EDT)
P.S. Deleted as requested. As to your MPR suggestions, I prefer to vary the topics rather than repeatedly post similar points. But thanks and we can cycle back to your suggestion.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:49, 21 September 2017 (EDT)

Spelling fix needed

File:16th Amedment.jpg http://www.conservapedia.com/File:16th_Amedment.jpg Progressingamerica (talk) 13:25, 23 September 2017 (EDT)

Corrected. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:31, 23 September 2017 (EDT)
Thanks. Could you lower the protection on this by one level so that the broken links can be resolved? Template:US amendments Progressingamerica (talk) 17:05, 27 September 2017 (EDT)

Two requests

Hello Andy, please delete the article National liberalism. It is an unsourced essay-like article created by an editor who is biased against the insurgent right-wing conservative European movements and is trying to frame them as liberal (if those parties are liberal, then does this mean that Angela Merkel -- the pro-EU and -mass migration globalist -- is conservative?).

Also, would you please add the fact that Angela Merkel's CDU (which is not any more Christian despite its name -- Merkel was the one who legalized gay "marriage" recently, for example, and doesn't mind that homeschooling is outright illegal) won its lowest result since 1949 and that the Alternative for Germany won seats for the first time?[10] --1990'sguy (talk) 14:18, 25 September 2017 (EDT)

Andy, please reply to my requests here (the first one can wait, though, but the second one should be acted upon now), along with David's. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:37, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, in addition to everything else, please add these links to the "See also" section of the Similarities between Communism, Nazism and liberalism article:
--1990'sguy (talk) 22:12, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
Added these as requested. Not sure how to proceed on the other requests. The first one seeks a deletion, which I'm reluctant to do. The second one seems to suggest adding an editorial-type of comment, to which I am not opposed.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:10, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
For the Merkel/CDU/AfD request, please add it to Template:Mainpageright. You don't have to worry about the other request right now, since I told him to improve the article at the "Problems with your "national liberalism" article" of his talk page (the article has serious concerns, mainly liberal bias, falsely calling several conservative European parties "liberal" and tying them to the Nazi Party -- all without any sources whatsoever). --1990'sguy (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, please take care of the Merkel/CDU/AfD Template:Mainpageright request, in addition to DavidB4's requests below. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:58, 26 September 2017 (EDT)

I'm going to have to agree with 1990sGuy about this "national liberalism" article. The subject needs to be bona-fide to be an article here, and there's a hint that it's painting other political parties as something they are not, then it has to go. Karajou (talk) 00:40, 27 September 2017 (EDT)

OK, please edit or delete the entry as you think best.
As to the Merkel issue, I'm not following German politics enough to know whether a victory by her, albeit with a low percentage, is a good or bad thing. It would depend on who her opponents were, I suppose. Regardless, that news would not override the news from Alabama, which I do know a lot about.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:44, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Andy, Merkel lost a major numerous of seats, and these seats were taken by the Alternative for Germany party, a conservative and Euroskeptic party. This election was about liberal globalists losing ground and conservative nationalists gaining. Please add to mainpageright -- I am OK with you doing it below the mention of Roy Moore. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:40, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
OK, thanks, I just haven't been following German politics. I'll let the spectacular Alabama news sit there a bit longer and then post this good news from Germany. Thanks for letting me know!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:04, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Well, then I will wait a bit until asking you again to post this -- but we shouldn't wait too long. In the meantime, would you please post this news, as you said you would above? Also, You inserted only one "<big>" tag at MPR, so everything below the Roy Moore news has big letters. Please fix. --1990'sguy (talk) 14:55, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Posted news about the Germany election, as you suggested. As to the Israeli wall, opposition to a border wall is not based on doubts that it would stop the flow of illegals, so the story is not really surprising or newsworthy. But thanks for your suggestions.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:17, 28 September 2017 (EDT)

National liberalism appears to be a real thing. See my post to the articles talk page.Conservative (talk) 08:03, 1 October 2017 (EDT)

another delete request

Hi, in addition to my earlier request and 1990'sguy's request just above, would you please also delete this redirect to help prevent assignment to the wrong category name? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 10:33, 26 September 2017 (EDT)

Thanks for those deletions! When you get a chance, would you also please take cre of the other two things I asked about:
  1. Change the category on Template:Nb_zl_camelids to Category:Camelids (or just unlock it so I can)
  2. Unlock Camelid
Thank you again! --David B (TALK) 01:07, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Unlocked both for you. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:14, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Thank you! If you want to reprotect the template (Template:Nb_zl_camelids), I'm finished with it. --David B (TALK) 19:07, 27 September 2017 (EDT)
Re-protected, thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:10, 28 September 2017 (EDT)

Requests related to administrative tasks

I recently received some requests from User: 1990sguy but I have been in the midst of engaging in a lot of matters off wiki so I have not been checking my email account devoted to Conservapedia matters. I see this situation continuing for a good while. Karajou has been busy with some things off wiki and it sounds like he may be busy for awhile.

Andy, please make User:DavidB4 an admin who does not yet have main page posting privileges. Consider doing the same for User: 1990sguy. Conservative (talk) 08:10, 1 October 2017 (EDT)

I don't want to push or pressure, but I just want to note that I really have very little interest in main mage posting anyway, so I would be happy with such an arrangement. Very happy, in fact, since I would find delete, protect, and unprotect quite useful. Checkuser might also be helpful in my efforts of blocking abusable IPs. It's up to you, of course. --David B (TALK) 17:15, 10 October 2017 (EDT)
I did not notice this discussion until just now. I will continue to make MPR/main page requests on your talk page, assuming editing the main page is your main concern about me being an admin. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:29, 10 October 2017 (EDT)
(but I will be content if you choose to only make DavidB4 an admin) --1990'sguy (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2017 (EDT)

MPR request

Hello Andy, please add Steve Scalise's statement that his recent shooting made him even more pro-gun -- something that flies in the face of liberals: [11] --1990'sguy (talk) 19:04, 3 October 2017 (EDT)

Andy? --1990'sguy (talk) 09:49, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
Your suggestion is good, but who is the intended audience for that proposed news item? In some ways it might reinforce a negative view that young liberals have about Republicans, coming so close on the heals of the mass murder in Las Vegas. It is might better to understand Stephen Paddock first.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2017 (EDT)--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:44, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
I would say everyone, as conservatives can use this story to counter liberals when they claim (emotionalistic arguments) that victims of shootings want more gun control or when they say mass shootings are proof that gun control is necessary, and as liberals who view CP would see their own assumptions countered. Celebrities and the media consistently push for more gun control after these shootings, and we've all heard of Brady and Giffords, so people who are influenced by the MSM and Hollywood might find it interesting that someone in a similar situation came out of it with a different opinion.
I don't think this will reinforce any negative views that liberals have, at least if worded the right way. Besides, liberals need to hear clear and strong arguments on why the 2nd Amendment is a good thing -- it seems like many of the "spokesmen" for conservatism in the past decades have been weak and accepting of the Left's assumptions, and that (seeing spokesmen for the opposite ideology fail to make good arguments) reinforces the negative views of liberals about conservatives. I saw a decent amount of media coverage wondering what Scalise now thinks about gun control, so this might surprise people, particularly liberals. We cannot go on the defensive on gun control because of a mass shooting -- if we do, we're accepting the Left's assumptions and letting them gain ground. --1990'sguy (talk) 20:01, 4 October 2017 (EDT)
Update: Scalise did another interview where he took an even stronger stance for gun rights, saying that it's still too early to consider a bump stock ban, and saying that liberals want a slippery slope that will slowly end gun rights in the U.S.[12] --1990'sguy (talk) 18:03, 5 October 2017 (EDT)
Andy, please reply. Frankly, I am getting tired of how slow things take here. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:29, 5 October 2017 (EDT)
It's not a slow response, but skepticism about whether Scalise's position warrants a headline. The GOP leadership opposes gun control, period. As I responded earlier, I don't see Scalise's position moving young liberals trying to make sense of the Las Vegas massacre. Insights that are directly about that are of greater interest than political posturing from D.C. I welcome comments by others on this issue.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 10:31, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
I don't know if this report specifically will be influential, but perhaps it could be. I do think it's important to show why constitutional carry is important, but I'm not sure what form that should take.
Unfortunately, in this case a civilian armed with a pistol might not have stopped this, since s/he would need to fire up very far, to a distance at which a pistol becomes inaccurate. Firing back may have deterred the attacker, but it could have also put those in neighboring apartments at risk. Too bad no one there had a rife! --David B (TALK) 20:36, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
I also would like to see more people pointing out that gun laws already make civilian possession, sale, and purchase of a machine gun illegal--clearly that law did a lot of good. As we know, when someone wants a weapon for a crime, they don't typically go to Wal-Mart. --David B (TALK) 20:39, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
Andy, the GOP leadership, in general, is weak -- they're giving in to liberal pressure to enact gun control. And even if this bump stock ban doesn't really infringe of the Second Amendment, it is definitely a slippery slope to opening the door to additional gun regulations. In the U.S. and other countries, all the gun regulations weren't established in one law -- they were created in multiple small laws, each one of them appearing to be "reasonable," but either motivated by an emotionalistic response to a mass shooting or by faith in an expansive government. This bump stock ban is merely a continuation of the slippery slope to socialism.
Frankly, I do think that regardless of how influential the news about Scalise is, I think it will be at least as much as the news about who the shooter was. The news about Scalise directly shatters the assumptions of the Left -- we're used to seeing people like Brady and Giffords who support gun control after being shot, but now we see someone doing the opposite (and Brady was a Republican, so the Scalise news might still surprise liberals). --1990'sguy (talk) 22:24, 6 October 2017 (EDT)
You persuaded me, 1990'sguy, that Rep. Scalise's comments should be a MPR headline. I've posted it with your link. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:33, 7 October 2017 (EDT)
Thank you, Andy -- I really appreciate it. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2017 (EDT)

Delete and move request

Andy, please delete the redirect Conservative Political Action Conference, and then move the page CPAC to where the redirect was, in accordance with CP's standard of having the full name of an organization as the article title. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:51, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Done as suggested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:45, 14 October 2017 (EDT)

Donald Trump achievements

In less than 10-and-a-half months of existence, the Donald Trump achievements article that I created received over 205,000 views. If this rate keeps up, it will have about 1 million views by the next Inauguration Day. Please move the article's link in MPL further up to give it increased visibility on the main page -- this is a topic that people are interested in, and it helps CP if we promote well-sourced and high-quality articles that people are interested in. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:44, 14 October 2017 (EDT)

In addition, I recommend putting other "hot topic" articles at the top of the main page. I recommend moving the Globalism (which I think has doubled its number of page views since early this year or late last year) and European migrant crisis articles further up, and adding the Fake news article, which has received over 12,000 views in less than 11 months, to MPL. The latter two articles are also very well-sourced and have a high quality. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2017 (EDT)
Done as suggested. You make great points. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:14, 15 October 2017 (EDT)
Thank you (by the way, the Donald Trump achievements article got another 1,000 views since I last posted here). I am curious, however, about why you didn't add the fake news article? --1990'sguy (talk) 23:44, 15 October 2017 (EDT)
I think fake news entry could be improved. It doesn't convey the sense that it is used by Donald Trump. Thanks and I welcome more edits. I'll try to work on it also.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:43, 16 October 2017 (EDT)

Delete requests

Hello Andy, please delete these unnecessary redirects:

Thanks. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:26, 17 October 2017 (EDT)

I hate to add more to the already long list, but at some point these redirects probably should be deleted too, to clean up search results:
These page names actually contain the quote marks (or double apostrophes) which is unnecessary. Thank you! --David B (TALK) 18:45, 17 October 2017 (EDT)
Andy? --1990'sguy (talk) 18:56, 20 October 2017 (EDT)
Deleted many of them. Will get the rest later. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:26, 20 October 2017 (EDT)
Deleted the remainder. Thanks for your patience.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:25, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
You're welcome. Here are more:
--1990'sguy (talk) 12:53, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
Done as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:44, 22 October 2017 (EDT)
Thank you--unfortunately, many of those were created by me when I moved the pages to their correct names. It seems I can't move a page without creating a redirect, which while sometimes helpful, can also be messy. Thanks for cleaning that up! Would you also please delete the following when you get the chance? There are a lot of these.
Thank you again! --David B (TALK) 00:22, 23 October 2017 (EDT)
Deleted as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:54, 23 October 2017 (EDT)

Thanks, would you please also delete the following when you get a chance?

Thanks again! Clearly, there is no rush--this is just standard cleanup. --David B (TALK) 14:48, 26 October 2017 (EDT)

Done as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 09:27, 12 November 2017 (EST)
Thank you! --David B (TALK) 18:05, 13 November 2017 (EST)

Please delete the redirect Category:Popular songs --1990'sguy (talk) 12:00, 24 November 2017 (EST)

Done as requested! Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:26, 24 November 2017 (EST)
I found some more redirects to delete:
--1990'sguy (talk) 12:45, 24 November 2017 (EST)
Andy? --1990'sguy (talk) 12:51, 25 November 2017 (EST)
I just promoted your account to delete privileges. However, please use carefully and please do not delete any content entries without checking first here. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:31, 25 November 2017 (EST)
Thank you. I will go to you for every page that I'm not sure about (along with every content article), just like I have either asked you or DavidB4 about uploading questionable imagages even though I have image upload rights. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:20, 25 November 2017 (EST)

Conservative of the Year 2017

Hello Andy, in case you haven't seen, I created the Conservative of the Year 2017 page. Of course, feel free to add, or post on the main page. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:46, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Fabulous work! I'll think of who else to add as nominees.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:15, 9 November 2017 (EST)

Veterans

Hello Andy, I probably should have asked you this earlier today, but would you please make an MPR blurb about how President Trump has been helping veterans, linking to Donald Trump achievements: Veterans? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:22, 11 November 2017 (EST)

Done, thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2017 (EST)

Roy Moore

Andy, would you please add Roy Moore's article to the main page, at least until the general election? Would you please add a "featured article section up top for that, to avoid having Moore's article be lost among the other articles after a reshuffle? I think his article has a very high quality. --1990'sguy (talk) 13:55, 12 November 2017 (EST)

Also, would you please add to MPR Moore's statement that McConnell should resign, as well as the fact that the lawyer representing the fifth accuser, Gloria Allred, is a liberal who supports abortion (and actually had an abortion before it was legalized), homosexual "marriage", and was a Democrat delegate this election[13]? The second blurb about Allred undermines her client's claim to being a conservative Republican (why would a conservative go to her?). --1990'sguy (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2017 (EST)
In addition to the above, I would like to let you know of Thomas Wictor's analysis of the claims made against Moore, in which he shows that Moore is innocent. I recommend sharing this with whomever necessary. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:20, 14 November 2017 (EST)

You could also add to MPR the hypocrisy of how the media is failing to report on criminal charges against Bob Menendez which otherwise are similar to the allegations against Moore,[14][15] or how the same Republicans condemning Moore are defending Menendez.[16] --1990'sguy (talk) 17:48, 14 November 2017 (EST)

I would appreciate it if you would at least reply to my suggestions. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:13, 14 November 2017 (EST)
Your suggestions are very good. This topic is top priority. The items posted just seemed slightly more compelling than the links you recommended. For example, posting a link to a Twitter feed is not ideal. But thanks so much for the terrific ideas, which are spot on.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 01:05, 15 November 2017 (EST)
Thanks. What do you think about adding this to MPR? Moore's campaign is giving good evidence here to the contrary of the allegations against him. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:39, 15 November 2017 (EST)
Andy, I know you're busy (I saw you at Judge Moore's rally today), but would you please explain why this is not something to add, if you rejected it? I like to know why on things like this. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2017 (EST)
Traveling to and from Birmingham yesterday kept me mostly off Conservapedia. Sorry!
Your suggestions are great but in light of our audience, I think the double standard concerning Al Franken is slightly better. But let's find a way to work your best links onto the Main Page.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:33, 17 November 2017 (EST)
Sounds good. I also found this link, where Franklin Graham notes that the people condemning Moore for these allegations are guilty of doing even worse things.[17] --1990'sguy (talk) 23:44, 17 November 2017 (EST)

Is there any chance that you would post the fact that several women have come out defending Moore's character, one of the things I posted above? Breitbart News also published an article about this: [18] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2017 (EST)

Done, thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:19, 19 November 2017 (EST)

Unlock request

Hello,
Would you please unlock the image File:567rugyhj.png so I can give it a meaningful name as requested by 1990'sguy? I will then correct the file references on other pages so nothing breaks. Thank you! --David B (TALK) 20:17, 27 November 2017 (EST)

In addition to DavidB4's request above, what is your opinion of adding this story to MPR? The MSM widely reported on the write-in challenger, but they overlooked the fact that he is apparently a liberal trying to steal the election from Moore. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:53, 27 November 2017 (EST)
Brilliant suggestion. Absolutely brilliant. Done. Please feel free to expand on my new entry about Doug Jones also!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:18, 28 November 2017 (EST)
I will expand the page when I get time, hopefully this evening. I've been storing good information about Jones and his leftist positions on Roy Moore's talk page. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:27, 28 November 2017 (EST)
Thank you for the unlock! I've renamed it to File:European Union flag.png and fixed all file references. I also took the opportunity to add categorize the file while I could. If you would like, you can lock it again as far as I am concerned. --David B (TALK) 10:47, 28 November 2017 (EST)
Re-locked it, thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:10, 28 November 2017 (EST)

More delete requests

Hello again,
When you get the chance, would you please delete:

Thank you! --David B (TALK) 16:04, 28 November 2017 (EST)

Done as requested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 13:50, 29 November 2017 (EST)
Thanks!
As general house-keeping, would you also please delete:
Talk:Los Angeles deputy describes rescuing newborn buried alive (talk page requesting deletion of main page, which has been deleted)
Category:Northwest Territories of Canada (Empty category)
User talk:Aeneas (talk page requesting deletion of main page, which has been deleted)
Thank you again! --David B (TALK) 15:26, 30 November 2017 (EST)
Done as requested. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:02, 30 November 2017 (EST)

More unlock requests

Hello again,
I'm doing some category moves for 1990'sguy, but there are some pages I cannot recategorize because they are protected. Would you please unlock the following pages so I can recategorize them? (I may also rename the first two files)

Thank you! --David B (TALK) 15:44, 1 December 2017 (EST)

Also, as I move pages, the wiki forces me to leave a redirect behind, which is not always helpful. When you get the chance, would you also please delete the following pages, left behind after my page moves today? Sorry about the mess!

It is QUITE a list--there is certainly no rush, but I just don't want to leave a mess and confuse people when they are setting categories. Thank you! --David B (TALK) 17:00, 1 December 2017 (EST)

Isn't there a box you can uncheck when moving, to prevent this?--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:28, 1 December 2017 (EST)
Unfortunately, no. I have a check box for "add to watchlist" and another for "move associated talk page" but that is all. Here is a screenshot of what I see. I have been assuming that redirect-free moves are reserved for administrators, but perhaps this is not the case? --David B (TALK) 15:23, 2 December 2017 (EST)
Just promoted your account to "delete" privileges. You can do these requests directly yourself now. Congratulations!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 16:27, 2 December 2017 (EST)
Oh!! Okay, thank you very much! Would you still please unlock those those pages I mentioned above at some point? Thanks again! --David B (TALK) 16:38, 2 December 2017 (EST)
On a side note, I believe I have just about finished the rewrite of United States presidential election, 1884. I know you were interested in my suggested changes, so I just wanted to let you know. --David B (TALK) 17:22, 2 December 2017 (EST)
Unlocked as requested, and I look forward to reviewing United States presidential election, 1884!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:11, 2 December 2017 (EST)

It seems that Template:User McCain has cascading protection turned on, which means I still cannot edit File:John McCain official portrait 2009.jpg. Would you please change or remove protection on Template:User McCain so I can make this edit? All the others are done, and can be re-protected. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 14:42, 4 December 2017 (EST)

In addition to DavidB4's request above, would you please add President Trump's endorsement of Roy Moore and/or SCOTUS's upholding of the travel ban to MainPageRight? --1990'sguy (talk) 16:56, 4 December 2017 (EST)
Not to distract from 1990'sguy's request above, but thank you Andy for the unlock. I'm done with all the pages now, so they can be locked again. --David B (TALK) 17:41, 4 December 2017 (EST)
Done, thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:18, 4 December 2017 (EST)

Jerusalem

Surely the news about the embassy in Jerusalem merits an MPR item.[19] PeterKa (talk) 21:54, 5 December 2017 (EST)

Yes, this is big news -- finally, we have a president willing to buck the liberal/globalist status-quo. However, is it better to wait until the announcement is official tomorrow to post on Mainpageright? --1990'sguy (talk) 22:18, 5 December 2017 (EST)
Here's a left-wing double standard: Chuck Schumer, who claims to support the move, criticized Trump for "indecisiveness" on whether to make the decision.[20] However, what Trump will do is much more than what any other president, including the Democrats (and probably also Hillary Clinton), ever did. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:09, 5 December 2017 (EST)
(edit conflict, responding to first two postings above) I don't object to this but, as I've mentioned before, our focus here is on American issues. This news is not much of a headline in the United States, or controversial here, and we're not experts on issues local to the Middle East.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:59, 5 December 2017 (EST)
Really? I've seen a lot local Israel stuff of MPR. After all, it's the Holy Land. Up to you, I suppose. A move like this would normally be a huge deal. But there are at least four other major stories all approaching their climaxes: Roy Moore, North Korean nukes, the Mueller investigation, and the tax bill. So I can understand if it gets lost in the shuffle. PeterKa (talk) 05:32, 6 December 2017 (EST)
I think it should be posted on MPR for a few reasons:
  • This news is a major headline in the United States, and it's also controversial even in the U.S. -- every news outlet, including the MSM and conservative media, is putting this story at the top of their front pages -- and it will become even more major once President Trump gives his speech on it, where he will presumably say do we're expecting him to do.
  • This story is more than just about the Middle East, it's about official U.S. policy in the Middle East.
  • This issue is very important to both evangelical Christians, many Jews (even Democrats, actually, but mainly Republicans), and possibly other conservative Christian denominations.
--1990'sguy (talk) 08:41, 6 December 2017 (EST)
This seems like something worth mentioning to me as well. It's true that that is more of an issue in the middle east than here, but consider this: The UN has been attacking Israel for a while now, making proclamations that Israel is not a legitimate country, should give its land to their Arab neighbors, are aggressors, etc. Israel (rightly) pulled funding from the UN, but that's about all they can do. Now amidst all of this pressure from the UN, the US is taking a stand for their legitimacy. By moving to Jerusalem, we say to the world that we believe Israel has a legitimate claim on their capitol. I know some people in the U.S. really don't care about Israel, but there is a lot more to this move than just a matter of scenery, convenience, etc. We are taking a stand in the view of the world to say that we support Israel. They have constantly been the victims, but we are saying that we still do support them. We are also going against the UN and its agenda. --David B (TALK) 23:53, 6 December 2017 (EST)
I've spent a lot of time speaking with Israelis and learned enough to know that these issues are complex and difficult to understand from afar. For example, I don't know how supportive Israelis themselves are of the United States moving our embassy to Jerusalem, and I don't know what it really means for that international city. Certainly we have the right to do that and I support President Trump's decision, but I don't pretend to understand all the local implications halfway around the world.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2017 (EST)
Agreed, there is a lot we can't see, and I don't know how helpful this will be, or what other impacts it will have. I do know that Benjamin Netanyahu told former president Obama on at least one occasion that "Mr. President, it is time to move the embassy." I also know that he has already spoken in support of it when the issue was more recently discussed. (see: [21]) Still, you are right, we don't know the inner workings of Israeli politics. --David B (TALK) 00:44, 7 December 2017 (EST)
I can say for sure that Israel's leaders strongly supported Trump's decision: [22][23] Also, Israelis think more highly of President Trump than the people of any other country, as of June 2017.[24] The announcement has undoubtedly increased that rating. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:48, 7 December 2017 (EST)
Thanks for the excellent points. It may be a brilliant move. The push for it did not originate with Trump, but he is the decisive leader who got it done. Moreover, as implied above, Obama refused to do it, so that suggests it is a step in the right direction. Appreciate the insights about this above.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:21, 7 December 2017 (EST)
Congress voted to move the embassy back in 1995. In 2010, the U.S. opened an oversized consulate in Jerusalem that's ready to serve as an embassy. All they would have to do is switch the signs on the gates. All the same, it doesn't look like it's gonna happen anytime soon. PeterKa (talk) 05:21, 8 December 2017 (EST)
Yes, I don't see why they need to build a new building in Jerusalem to be the embassy -- opponents of moving the embassy in the administration could use this to stall the move to make sure it never takes place. At the same time, at least President Trump actually recognized Jerusalem (a statement of reality) and started taking steps to move the embassy. His predecessors were just talk: [25] The people of Tel Aviv also seem to like this decision: [26] --1990'sguy (talk) 10:26, 8 December 2017 (EST)
Jewish scholars seem opposed ... or are they merely anti-Trump? [27]


Interesting--clearly not all are in support of it, anyway. However, now I'm curious:

  1. Who qualifies as a "scholar"?
  2. Is Israeli academia as liberal as ours?
  3. Why could they only find 100 people to sign this?

Maybe I'm just being too suspicious, but they seem like legitimate questions which are not dealt with in this article. --David B (TALK) 15:05, 8 December 2017 (EST)

We see this all the time in campaigns --> "100 generals/pastors/businessmen/etc. sign letter in support for Trump/Hillary/etc." It makes you think that the candidate has the support of all pastors/generals/etc., but there are thousands -- at least -- of these people, so having 100 or less of them sign a letter is meaningless, other than the good-looking headline.
Let's also remember that academics tend to be very far-left, even by Democrat Party standards. These scholars are probably more sympathetic to the Palestinians than they are to Israel.
Let's not let these 100 academics distract from how much support there is from what President Trump did. Just earlier this year, the U.S. Senate unanimously called on Trump to move the embassy: [28] Even Chuck Schumer wanted this, and he wanted Trump to declare Jerusalem as "undivided," as I mentioned above. The Zionist Organization of America is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the U.S., and it also supported the decision. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:32, 8 December 2017 (EST)
Maybe I'm the only one who missed this little tidbit, but apparently since the The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, presidents have been actively delaying the project, by issuing 6-month wavers. It is only now that Trump has again issued a waver, but ordered the project to begin. Presumably, this will be the last waver. [29] --David B (TALK) 12:36, 9 December 2017 (EST)

Please unlock

Hi, would you please unlock the following pages, so I can finish up some category clean-up?

  1. File:Steam locomotive.jpg
  2. File:Csx railroad.jpg
  3. File:Gallitzin rr.jpg

Thank you! It's not at all a high priority, but probably should be done at some point. --David B (TALK) 13:25, 12 December 2017 (EST)

Unlocked as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:48, 12 December 2017 (EST)
Thank you! I'm done with them, so they can be relocked now. --David B (TALK) 15:43, 12 December 2017 (EST)

Possible Mainpage Right Story

Andy,

I'm just wondering if this story should be added to mainpage right.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/religious-schools-homeschoolers-to-get-a-boost-in-gop-tax-plan-thanks-to-ted-cruz-and-mike-pence/article/2643722

To summarize the story, 529 plans are college savings plans. Parents can put money aside to help their kids pay for college, and get tax advantages (Most states exempt money put into a 529 plan from income taxes, for instance. The tax bill, if it passes, will let the money be used for private elementary or secondary school tuition and homeschooling expenses. I haven't seen this part of the bill get a lot of attention in the media, and since Conservapedia was started as an encyclopedia for homeschoolers, and a lot of the users still homeschooler or are or were homeschoolers, thought that this might be worth including.--Whizkid (talk) 12:52, 18 December 2017 (EST)

For the record, not all homeschoolers support the bill, out of fear that it could lead to greater federal interference in homeschooling: [30] --1990'sguy (talk) 16:54, 18 December 2017 (EST)

Americans say Merry Christmas

According to this poll, Americans, whether they support or oppose Trump, prefer the term "Merry Christmas" over "Happy Holidays" (though the proportion for Trump supporters is higher than anti-Trump people).[31] This might be something we could add to Mainpageright. --1990'sguy (talk) 10:15, 25 December 2017 (EST)

Terrific suggestion! Posted.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:39, 25 December 2017 (EST)

Yet more unlock requests

Hi Andy,
I'm working on some more category capitalization correction, but have a few protected images in the way of progress. There is no hurry, but at some point would you please unlock the following images to I can fix their category references?

Thank you again! --David B (TALK) 14:05, 2 January 2018 (EST)

Unlocked as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2018 (EST)
Thank you, I'm done with these, so they be protected again if you wish. --David B (TALK) 16:07, 2 January 2018 (EST)
Would you also please unlock the following images for the same reason?
File:MarianRejewski.jpg
File:MarieCurie.jpg
File:Nicholas copernicus.gif
File:GuglielmoMarconi.jpg
File:Nobel Jorn 111207.jpg
File:Al Gore VP portrait 1994.jpg
File:Charles dawes.jpg
File:Theodore roosevelt.jpg
Again, there is no hurry. Thank you! --David B (TALK) 11:52, 5 January 2018 (EST)
Thank you! It seems that one of these did get missed, though, so would you please unlock File:Nicholas copernicus.gif?
Also, would you do the same for Miley Cyrus so I can fix a couple minor issues?
Thanks again! --David B (TALK) 15:21, 11 January 2018 (EST)
Conservative unlocked them. --1990'sguy (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2018 (EST)
So I see, thank you both! I'm done with these pages now, so they can all be protected again, if needed. --David B (TALK) 16:31, 11 January 2018 (EST)

Bad DACA bill

The "bipartisan" (aka. uniparty) DACA bill only provides for 10% of the wall and a 3% cut to chain migration: [32] This may be something to add to MPR, though it's obviously up to you. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2018 (EST)

That is just terrible. If Trump approves that, I will be very disappointed. It's not surprising that a sellout like Lindsey Graham would help write something like this. --David B (TALK) 22:35, 11 January 2018 (EST)
Also, on a slightly related topic, Tucker Carlson makes a very good point on Trump's s***hole comment: [33] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:39, 11 January 2018 (EST)

Thanks for the very interesting points. Looks like others want to post about other topics so we'll see what tomorrow brings on the above issues.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2018 (EST)

Would you please unprotect the Joe Arpaio article so I can update it? --1990'sguy (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2018 (EST)

Great suggestion! Done as requested. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:39, 12 January 2018 (EST)

Protected edit request

Andy, would you please add{{See also|Liberal hypocrisy}} to the top of the protected Double standard article or at least add the link to "Liberal hypocrisy" to the former article's "See also" section at the bottom? I don't think you need to unprotect the article. --1990'sguy, 22:56, January 14, 2018

I hate to keep pestering you with these, but in addition to the above request, would you please unlock File:Potato-chips 275w.gif and File:Gather Ye Rosebuds While Ye May.jpg and File:Voyager.jpg so I can correct their categories? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 23:21, 19 January 2018 (EST)
In addition to DavidB4's requests above, have you been able to fix the image upload problem? --1990'sguy (talk) 00:35, 20 January 2018 (EST)
Andy, DavidB4's requests have not been done yet. --1990'sguy (talk) 18:17, 3 February 2018 (EST)
Sorry for the oversight! Done as requested.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:49, 3 February 2018 (EST)
Thank you! I'm done with them, so they can be locked again. Would you also please unlock the following files for the same reason, so I can complete a request from 1990'sguy?
Thank you! --David B (TALK) 20:22, 3 February 2018 (EST)
Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2018 (EST)

Thank you, but I just discovered that File:Edison and phonograph.jpg is still protected due to cascading protection from American History Lecture Eight. Would you mind temporally turning off that cascading protection also? Thanks! --David B (TALK) 10:22, 5 February 2018 (EST)

Done as requested, I think. Please let me know if you have any additional issues.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:30, 5 February 2018 (EST)
Done, thanks! You can re-apply protection now. --David B (TALK) 12:43, 5 February 2018 (EST)

Topic for "In The News"

Dear Sir, were you aware that liberal artist Erykah Badu recently praised Adolph Hitler (specifically, his painting ability) in a recent interview this past week? Did you hear any outcry from the liberal media over it? I didn't think so, I only learned about it this morning when it was (briefly) mentioned in my local paper (The Dallas Morning News) within a weekly column. If you can discover more on this topic, I believe it would be a good addition to the "In The News" feature. Quidam65 (talk) 10:24, 28 January 2018 (EST)

I heard something about this, but was unfamiliar with the artist. More information would be welcome.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:44, 28 January 2018 (EST)

NYU students react to Trump's state of the union address

Hi Andy, I don't want to distract from the above suggestion, but here is another thing which might be worth posting to MPR. It's up to you, of course.
The open-minded students at another fine state university (NYU) have responded in firm opposition to Trump's state of the union address. Responses ranged from how racist it was, to how outrageous that it was used as a campaign tool. There's only one problem...it hasn't even happened yet. Campus reform interviewed students, and here is a video on their findings: [34] and here is the full page on this: [35] --David B (TALK) 12:53, 29 January 2018 (EST)

Wonderful, posted as suggested. (By the way, NYU is a private university, not a state one.)--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:02, 29 January 2018 (EST)
Wait, how did I not know that it was private? Huh, Ignorance abounds, I guess. Thanks for letting me know. --David B (TALK) 15:05, 29 January 2018 (EST)

Image copyright

Hello Andy, I would like to upload these two images, but the image licensing is confusing. Does the licensing permit me to upload the images, or not? They apparently are uncontested on the English Wikipedia. Here are the images: [36][37]--1990'sguy (talk) 14:09, 30 January 2018 (EST)

They are OK to upload here as "fair use and probably public domain."--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2018 (EST)


Are you ready for some football? Half of all Americans are not

Andy, I wasn't sure if you saw the latest NBC/WSJ poll that said that 51% of Americans "don't follow football closely", up nine points in the past four years. Also, 48% of Americans said that if they had a child who wanted to play football, they'd encourage them to play another sport instead, which is up 8 points from 4 years ago. Here's an article about the poll, with a link to the actual poll in the article.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-nearly-half-parents-would-discourage-football-due-concussions-n843836?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma

--Whizkid (talk) 11:49, 4 February 2018 (EST)

Wonderful news story. I've posted it. Thank you.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 12:30, 4 February 2018 (EST)

MPR typo

Hi,
There is a typo in the "MPR" news section. I mentioned in on the talk page, but I guess it got lost in the noise. Several entries down, there is one which starts "Why did the Dems boo and his at Donald Trump...", but "his" should be "hiss". It might be a little late to fix it now, but perhaps it is better late than never. --David B (TALK) 12:47, 5 February 2018 (EST)

Inconsistency between In the News and Unplug the NFL articles

On the In the News article it says that all the Philadelphia Eagles players stood for the anthem the entire season. However, on the Unplug the NFL entry it mentions the Eagles as a team that had at least one player protesting the anthem this year (and that had a reference). They can't both be right, and I don't know which one is, so please research and fix the error. Thank you. Quidam65 (talk) 20:51, 7 February 2018 (EST)

Revised the headline. Thanks for catching this!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 21:44, 7 February 2018 (EST)
Thank you. Quidam65 (talk) 11:13, 8 February 2018 (EST)

Possible news article--Gag Order on Prof over Great Barrier Reef issue

Outside of Fox News (and this was solely an opinion piece) how much are you hearing about whether the famed Great Barrier Reef is or isn't really dying? This might be a consideration for In The News.

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/02/08/science-or-silence-my-battle-to-question-doomsayers-about-great-barrier-reef.html

Quidam65 (talk) 15:16, 8 February 2018 (EST)

Ah yes, another open-minded college which refuses to accept alternative viewpoints. This is definitely not a new controversy. The fact of the matter is that no, it is not dying. Like everything else in the world, it may be changing, but this is natural. I did a quick web search and pulled another result at random with a similar message: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/oct/25/alan-jones-launches-great-barrier-reef-site-after-criticising-global-warming-hoax
One fact is certain: Global warming is becoming a real, dramatic problem in a few places, most of all on Mars, where the temperatures have been skyrocketing for years. This must be due to all of the martians driving SUVs and using aerosols.... --David B (TALK) 15:46, 8 February 2018 (EST)

Listened to Senator Rand Paul last night

For a few hours, at least. The voice of one crying in the wilderness.

Based on the speeches I heard I have not one area of disagreement. And as a FedGov employee (your friendly DoD civilian leech at "work") I'm affected by these things (especially as a supervisor since I have to send out early morning messages as to what my team should do). The House did its job and passed all 12 appropriations bills (argue as you will their content, but at least they did their job)--the Senate has yet to take up one. Quidam65 (talk) 09:20, 9 February 2018 (EST)

I've also worked for the government, in the past. Not sure I would say that the "House did its job" by continuing its reckless deficit spending. But I appreciate your insights!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2018 (EST)
Maybe not how we would do things if we were there, but at least they sent something over. If the Senate were really that concerned about deficit spending they could amend the bills then discuss in conference. Quidam65 (talk) 08:27, 15 February 2018 (EST)

Unlock request

Would you please temporarily unlock Template:Christianity? I would like to fix a typo and add/fix a few links. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2018 (EST)

Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:14, 14 February 2018 (EST)
I made the changes/fixes -- you can lock the template again. Thanks! --1990'sguy (talk) 11:09, 14 February 2018 (EST)

Thanks for edit on Young Mass Murderers

I wasn't able to find anything on the block you completed (because, of course, the lamestream media has their agenda to push--in this case their hatred of military officer training). Quidam65 (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2018 (EST)

Request to unlock Deism page

This page has been locked for nearly a decade now. At least one other person has requested an unlock there in order to add some references and clear "citation needed" tags. Plus it needs some format cleanup. Quidam65 (talk) 08:30, 15 February 2018 (EST)

Error in In The News

It's a grammatical one, don't worry. "That, despite the fact that The Shape of Water was the the highest-grossing Best Picture winner in five years." You have the word "the" inadvertently repeated. Quidam65 (talk) 21:36, 5 March 2018 (EST)

Great catch. The error actually came from the quote/link. It is corrected now. Appreciate it.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 00:13, 6 March 2018 (EST)

Comment on Peyton Manning Article

Good way to tell only part of the story. The article says that Papa John's sold their stake in the joint venture as well. I know you dislike Peyton (maybe seeing him on every Sunday NFL commercial wore you out) but at least tell the WHOLE story. Quidam65 (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2018 (EST)

Appreciate the feedback, but I don't watch NFL football so I don't see Manning's ads. He's been criticized on this site as overhyped by the liberal media for a long time. I infer from the article that Papa John's sold their stake because Manning bailed out. He's always been weakest when needed most, and he shouldn't have allowed himself to be used as part of the NFL's scheme to push Tim Tebow out.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 15:21, 8 March 2018 (EST)

Delete or unlock request

Hello,
we have an empty category Category:Internet crime which is a duplicate of Category:Internet Crime. The former one is not in use, and has the wrong capitalization. Would you please either delete Category:Internet crime, or unlock it so I can? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 14:34, 10 March 2018 (EST)

Is this accurate?

I posted this edit on the Talk page for God http://www.conservapedia.com/Talk:God#Abrahamic_religion Am I accurately describing CP's POV?

Your statement is a reasonable one, although I would emphasize we remove liberal bias rather than have a POV of our own. I did promote your account to skip Captcha. Stick around!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:44, 20 March 2018 (EDT)

Thoughts on Princeton gun incident today

Hi Andy,

I was curious about your thoughts on the incident involving a gun at the Panera Bread on Nassau Street in Princeton. Fortunately, I was not in that area of Princeton today. GregG (talk) 20:46, 20 March 2018 (EDT)

You should really ask Panera Bread about that instead of us. After all, Panera Bread made it official back in 2014 that no guns were allowed on the premises. Surely, the gunman in this incident was aware of that policy[38]. Karajou (talk) 21:46, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
Greg, always good to hear from you. I guess this incident had nothing to do with the school, unless the perpetrator was a student. The school is on spring break.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2018 (EDT)
There was also in the news a Maryland high school shooting in which two students were wounded before the shooter was shot and killed by armed security. The liberal media will barely touch both because it goes against their agenda, and part of that agenda was to make both school and Panera "gun free zones", as if they believe the bad guys can read and heed. Karajou (talk) 01:42, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

Username change.

Hello, would it possible to change my name from my current one to a new one called Winston Smith? Thanks.

How about a change to WinstonSm? Full names are disfavored without verification. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 17:14, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
I'm highly suspicious that either supposed name given by this user is the user's real name, especially since these are well known literary characters. GregG (talk) 18:02, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
Either way, the user that wrote the request created that account only a few hours ago and only made two edits, both of them being requests to change the username. It's ridiculous to create a new account and immediately ask for a name change without doing anything else. --1990'sguy (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2018 (EDT)
Great points. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2018 (EDT)

New Essay

http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Great_Conservative_Media_Hated_by_Liberal_Critics

I'd like to see this essay get some promotion and contributors. You may think it's redundant in light of the other "Greatest Conservative..." essays on this site. But like the description says, it's not only meant to highlight great conservative media, but also how much that conservative media gets an undeserved negative reputation since most critics are liberal. I've been dismayed by the underwhelming and lackluster response my other essay got:

http://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:Virtue:_Christian_vs_secular

It only got two other editors, despite the fact that it's an essay that could go a long way towards countering the negative reputation that Christians have in the secular world.

Misspelling/redlink on Popular Articles

Hi.

There's a misspelling on one of the links included in the section Popular Articles on the main page, and by extension, a redlink that needs addressing: Specifically, one of the links says Essay:Greatest Consrvative Movies. It should say Essay:Greatest Conservative Movies. Pokeria1 (talk) 18:09, 28 March 2018 (EDT)

Great catch! Corrected it. Thanks!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2018 (EDT)

Reduce protection

Please reduce the protection level of Template:USPresidents to a mid-level permission.(such as users who have upload or block permission perhaps) Progressingamerica (talk) 21:46, 1 April 2018 (EDT)

Done as requested!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:57, 2 April 2018 (EDT)

MPR request (2)

Hello Andy, would you please add a link to Sadiq Khan (London's mayor) to the MPR blurb about London's murder rate? Khan is a left-wing Fabian Socialist, and his politically correct policies (as I showed in his article) have directly led to the increasing murder rate in London. --1990'sguy (talk) 00:45, 7 April 2018 (EDT)

A Question for Mr. Schlafly

Dear Mr. Schlafly, I find your site fascinating. One question I have -- and I pose it not in the spirit of argumentation / beginning an argument, but rather to receive an explanation from your point of view. Much of the material in the gospels could be interpreted as Christ urging people to take care of the poor. There are moments in the New Testament during which Christ suggests that accumulated wealth on earth will not be favorably looked upon in the next life (Matt. 19); during which Christ tells his disciples to sell their possessions and give all they have to the poor (Matt. 19); and so forth. Also, in Acts 4, it is suggested that Christ's apostles share possessions in common, and to a certain degree one might interpret that the failure to do so could have negative consequences (Acts 5: 1-5). In any event, I would very much appreciate reading your thoughts on this matter, if you have the opportunity to respond. Thank you very much for your time, D. C. User:Questions, 17:41, 8 April 2018

Very important news story for 2018

Andy, please see my post on the main talk page. The Hungarian election that just happened is one of the most important events of this year -- Viktor Orbán is the face of Europe conservatives who are fighting for national sovereignty and less immigration, and he won a massive victory, exceeding even his own party's expectations -- and literally the only issues he focused on were immigration and national sovereignty. This is a big victory for conservatives both in the U.S. and Europe, and a big defeat for globalism and the EU.

Orbán was the only European leader to endorse Trump in 2016, and the year before that, he built a wall on Hungary's southern border which cut illegal immigration by over 99%. This story should be added to MPR -- if we're going to add multiple stories in a row about minor events in the UK, we definitely should add the most important victory for conservatives in Europe this year. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:34, 8 April 2018 (EDT)

Another unlock request

Hello, not to distract from the above posts, but when you get a chance, would you please unlock Famous American writers, so I can edit change the category? Thank you! --David B (TALK) 09:43, 9 April 2018 (EDT)

In addition to DavidB4's request right above, please unlock the page Sonia Sotomayor, so I can fix the categories there. --1990'sguy (talk) 11:35, 9 April 2018 (EDT)
Thank for unlocking those!
There are also some pages which should be deleted at some point, as general maintenance, but are protected. Would you please either delete them yourself, or unlock them so I can do this?
Thanks! --David B (TALK) 16:24, 19 April 2018 (EDT)