Conservapedia:Community Portal

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(this page redirects from CP:COMPORT)
This is the place to discuss issues of interest to the Conservapedia community.

Community Portal/Archives

This page contains some material that has been moved from Talk:Main_Page. We are attempting to get general discussion of issues relating to Conservapedia's content and policies on this page, leaving the main talk page for its original purpose of discussing the content of the Main Page.



Eulogy

Many eulogies are for people who are still alive. Aristotle called this speaking epideicticly. I don't know what I'm talking about.

All who know me know what a positive person I am, having admired Trump, but I am still learning. In that spirit, allow me to eulogize my favorite same-sex-loving person, Christopher Ciccone.

I was just looking at my 1985 high school yearbook. The four years of classes voted Madonna (Ciccone) "Best female vocalist". Most every girl in those classes was out of my league at the time, so I guess I have to admit they knew more than me about some things. Anyway, it turns out Christopher claimed he designed Madonna's looks. People say her singing wasn't that great despite being the vocalist on a number of good songs, so her looks probably were a significant part of her appeal, and Christopher would deserve a lot of credit for her success.

Christopher became a well-respected interior designer and designed Madonna's beautiful and exquisitely tasteful mansion when she was rich and famous. And when she turned on him, he wrote a book about her that was fair about her trying to improve her sympathy towards her male companions, but still proved she was disloyal to people, said he nearly threw a punch at her pretty-boy newlywed husband for patronizing him and walked out of her life when she wouldn't stop doing to him all the things caused by what people have come to dislike about her. What's not to love about Christopher Ciccone? VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 07:16, 7 February 2021 (EST)

Commentary on the foregoing

You'll notice I used the word "love" in what could be taken in two different senses. This is a portal for communication among encyclopedia writers, so I think the writers who profess such ability should be able to handle this much ambiguity. If they think otherwise, I might mention it would be just as much their fault as mine for not seeing that as something upon which to be remarked.

People can use the word "love" in numerous ways and end in ambiguity and indeed contradiction. If you pay attention, you'll realize in one sense "love" can be Divine, in another ungodly. In one sense: fruits of the spirit (Isaiah 11)!; in another: sterility. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 06:18, 12 February 2021 (EST)

Main page news

Hello everybody there are important news I want share on main page. how can I introduce news? --Alex Kosh (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2021 (EST)

You can put it on User_talk:Aschlafly or User_talk:TerryH. At least in theory, Talk:Main_Page is the page for this purpose. PeterKa (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Photo upload

Hello, I want to know how I can upload photo file here? --Alex Kosh (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2021 (EST)

Hi, you can post specific requests here: Conservapedia:Image upload requests (CP:IUR).
Ideally, please find images which are either in the public domain, or under Creative Commons licenses. If you need any assistance, have questions, or need ideas on where to look, let me know. --DavidB4 (TALK) 21:51, 10 March 2021 (EST)

New Project Started

Hello Conservapedia editors! Yesterday I started Conservapedia:Project Current Events and I just wanted to invite anyone that wants to help out on the Project. The idea is similar to Wikipedia’s “Current Event WikiProject”, which I am the lead coordinator of, so hopefully Conservapedia can stay up to date on major current events. One such event that Wikipedia is barely talking about is 45 Office, which Donald Trump created yesterday. Because of my status on Wikipedia, I know a lot of the behind the scenes things, so hopefully I can grow Conservapedia just as much as I did Wikipedia. Feel free to join the Project. --Elijahandskip (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2021 (EDT)

Discussion for a possible new Wikipedia Article

Should a new article be started for discussions on Wikipedia that have major effects? (An example of one is Elijahandskip#Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory article). Or, should the discussion details be added to Wikipedia or Examples of Bias in Wikipedia. I don't really know if they should go in the examples of bias article, because some aren't really a "bias" per say, but have extreme lasting effects on Wikipedia. Also, if you think a new article, what would the articles title be? --Elijahandskip (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2021 (EDT)

My recommendation would be to create the page on WP's Ukraine conspiracy theory article if you have enough to make it not a just stub, and put a link to it from the Bias in WP portal to it. RobSFree Kyle! 18:13, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
Well I wasn't just thinking about that discussion in general. I have been a part of tons of 'major' discussion on Wikipedia. One also involved Wikipedia removing information about US Governor Impeachment efforts (Both Republican and Democratic governor impeachment efforts). I also participated and know the history of a discussion where Wikipedia was about to say the assassination of an Italian Diplomat was no notable for Wikipedia. I would be perfectly fine creating an article just for that discussion, but what about the other discussions that had controversy on Wikipedia? --Elijahandskip (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
Me personally, I'm all for bringing controversial questions that are squashed in Wikipedia here, and even making full-blown mainspace articles of them (see for example Murder of Seth Rich, Clinton donors in the Panama Papers and Naked short selling, for example. These are all full-blown articles that were censored in WP). The problem is not making just stub articles out of them. If there is only stub material, then it can go into the Biases in WP article with a link back to WP referencing the controversy. RobSFree Kyle! 18:28, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
The difference between a full-blown mainspace article and stubs usually will be the links to external sources, and not just links to WP talk pages. RobSFree Kyle! 18:36, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
If Wikipedia is suppressing well-researched work by an editor, properly sourced with external links, we want that work (generally in most cases). RobSFree Kyle! 18:38, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
Yeah. That is good advice. I will wait for a day or so to let a few other people drop their opinions. But that is a really good idea. --Elijahandskip (talk) 19:30, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
It sounds good in theory, at least. I don't want us to just become "anti-Wikipedia" though, but rather a place where discussion like that isn't stifled. Rob is right to point out those examples...the Seth Rich article in particular stands out to me, because that information was heavily suppressed on numerous platforms. When our page went up, there seemed to be a lot of interest. --DavidB4 (TALK) 20:50, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
We definitely should make articles for the Seth Rich article. Anything Wikipedia rejects is good for this site. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:04, 14 May 2021 (EDT)
i would say that we should also be lobbying search engines to teplace Wikipedia with this site as its more reliable. Or maybe with a more neutral version of this site

Conservapedia Scope

Just thought I'd ask the community here, but does anyone like the idea of Conservapedia allowing for a scope about as large as Wikipedia, but with obvious exceptions (e.g. no media that glorifies sin or is beyond vile). Perhaps allowing for some subjects that Wikipedia would not allow under their general notability guideline. Example: I made a Bulbasaur article & might make more Pokemon articles to accommodate the growing base of conservative gamers -- Wikipedia won't allow for articles on "non-notable" subjects and tend to take it too far, and perhaps this is an issue that Conservapedia can address. Although Wikipedia has an article on Bulbasaur, there are several other Pokemon that they simply merge in a list & so I wondered if a way to differentiate is have a subject on all Pokemon. There's probably a lot of students who would be eager to write essays on Pokemon if it were, let's say, a homework subject. At same time, having a guide for parents about Pokemon and the series because some conservative parents might feel uncomfortable about the series. Patriotic Gamer (talk) 12:59, May 28, 2021 (EDT)

Template:Infobox Film

I noticed in the Infobox Film template that there is no space included for production companies. Could the article be temporarily unlocked so I can add a production company space to that infobox? Northwest (talk) 21:59, August 31, 2021 (EDT)

Thanks for that, now its related article will need editing as well to bring it in line. Northwest (talk) 22:39, August 31, 2021 (EDT)

Added introduction to myself on forum

hey everyone, i just found this site and am so excited to learn together. already edited a few pages. I added a song to the Greatest Conservative Songs page and corrected the Hebrew on the Tower of Babel page. Looking forward to meeting you all online.

Welcome to our site and thanks for the contributions you've made so far. Just be sure to sign your posts when you post here and on talk pages. Northwest (talk) 23:03, September 1, 2021 (EDT)

Orphan pages

Orphan pages, particularly orphan stubs, have become a real problem at Conservapedia. [1] When creating new content, please follow these Guidelines: Conservapedia:Guidelines#Article_length. Stub pages (pages with less than 300 words), and particularly uncategorized stubs, orphaned stubs, stubs with few or no outgoing links have the detrimental effect of lowering our Google rankings. To avoid an accidental deletion during a routine cleanup of the server, when creating a stub, please integrate your new article into the whole wiki by de-orphaning it, adding a Category, and have a few good quality external links. Thank you. RobSFree Kyle! 15:04, September 15, 2021 (EDT)

Offline Conservapedia archive

I've undertaken an effort to create an offline archive of Conservapedia in OpenZim format that can be used for any of the following:

  • Homeschool parents who want to give their kids access without opening them up to the rest of the internet.
  • People in rural (homesteaders) or remote areas (missionaries) with little or no internet access.
  • Preppers who are trying to keep archives of important data in case the access to the internet is lost or severely censored.

I'm using the mwoffliner tool but I discovered that the version of Mediawiki running on the site needs to be updated for compatibility with that tool. I went ahead and created a clone of Conservapedia on my home computer using the latest version on Docker. As I started to archive the site with mwoffliner there are a few pages that I stumbled upon that had issues causing errors with the archival. I would like to offer my help to the community at large with contributing back these corrections and to share the finished ZIM file when it is ready. Is there anyone who would like to join me in this effort? It would be especially helpful if someone could help by upgrading the site from the current version of 1.24.2 to 1.36.1 or later. I'm willing to pitch in if needed.

Thanks! -- John6 (talk) 22:26, September 15, 2021 (EDT)

I know the current version level of the site is incompatible with some modern tools, and that is unfortunate. While I have no say in the upgrade decision, my understanding is that it probably won't be happening for some time. 1.24 offers features and options with were removed or changed in later versions.
As for the issues you noted, you might want to check logs, and see if any pages in particular are giving you issues. There are a few pages with weird (typically ASCII) symbol codes, or NBS characters, which can mess with API calls. You might want to see if you can identify specific problematic pages, and exclude them, so you can archive the rest (if you are able to do so at all, with this wiki version). --DavidB4 (TALK) 02:16, September 16, 2021 (EDT)
It is hard for me to tell how many of the issues were a result of the export and rebuild process on the newer version of Mediawiki. The best way to know is to perform the export from the live site. Is there anything I can contribute to help get us ready to upgrade to a newer version? What features were removed and can I help to migrate to something new? John6 (talk) 18:26, September 17, 2021 (EDT)