Changes

:Davidkon, we have no way to confirm your experience, but even if true it is not typically for public school science teachers, most of whom can be very liberal and very dogmatic about the theory of evolution.  Also, I find it odd that "he still expects us to know the material for the AP exam."  AP exams are like extra credit, for an extra charge, and are rarely a requirement of any public school class.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:21, 3 February 2010 (EST)

:Davidkon, we have no way to confirm your experience, but even if true it is not typically for public school science teachers, most of whom can be very liberal and very dogmatic about the theory of evolution.  Also, I find it odd that "he still expects us to know the material for the AP exam."  AP exams are like extra credit, for an extra charge, and are rarely a requirement of any public school class.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:21, 3 February 2010 (EST)

As I’ve said before, my AP Bio class is relatively harmless, but my AP government class is sure getting out of hand! The entire class is one big batch of liberal propaganda about how social reform is “necessary” and how that the current conservative platform on homosexuality is one of “intolerance and bigotry”, and that’s a direct quote from the textbook! There are countless other biases that I have to deal with on a daily basis. On top of that when I asked my teacher about concerns the course is liberally biased, she told me “David, I’m sorry to tell you this, but ''reality'' has a liberal bias.” Can you believe that!?!--[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 22:22, 2 March 2010 (EST)

As I’ve said before, my AP Bio class is relatively harmless, but my AP government class is sure getting out of hand! The entire class is one big batch of liberal propaganda about how social reform is “necessary” and how that the current conservative platform on homosexuality is one of “intolerance and bigotry”, and that’s a direct quote from the textbook! There are countless other biases that I have to deal with on a daily basis. On top of that when I asked my teacher about concerns the course is liberally biased, she told me “David, I’m sorry to tell you this, but ''reality'' has a liberal bias.” Can you believe that!?!--[[User:Davidkon|Davidkon]] 22:22, 2 March 2010 (EST)

== Unable to edit? ==

== Unable to edit? ==

I would like to post the following to the Jesse Helms article after "Foreign Policy" but am locked out. I don't know why.  {{unsigned|BertSchlossberg}}

I would like to post the following to the Jesse Helms article after "Foreign Policy" but am locked out. I don't know why.  {{unsigned|BertSchlossberg}}

: Editing is often turned off overnight (U.S. time), which may have been your problem, although that means that you shouldn't have been able to post here, so unless it was turned back on in the meantime, I can't explain it.  Would you like to try it again?  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 19 December 2007 (EST)

: Editing is often turned off overnight (U.S. time), which may have been your problem, although that means that you shouldn't have been able to post here, so unless it was turned back on in the meantime, I can't explain it.  Would you like to try it again?  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 19 December 2007 (EST)

==To Kill The Child/Leaving Beirut==

==To Kill The Child/Leaving Beirut==

I just wrote an exteremly long and extensive artical about these two songs. Then, when I went to save the page, it said that it did not save it because there was a quote in their to explain about the song that contained a profanity. What gives? I thought that this website was supposed to educate people, yet people cannot be educated if they cannot know what the artical is talking about and what the proof is.  {{unsigned|Std}}

I just wrote an exteremly long and extensive artical about these two songs. Then, when I went to save the page, it said that it did not save it because there was a quote in their to explain about the song that contained a profanity. What gives? I thought that this website was supposed to educate people, yet people cannot be educated if they cannot know what the artical is talking about and what the proof is.  {{unsigned|Std}}

: We have a profanity filter for good reason, but sometimes exceptions need to be made.  You haven't supplied enough information for us to judge if this warrants an exception.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:47, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

: We have a profanity filter for good reason, but sometimes exceptions need to be made.  You haven't supplied enough information for us to judge if this warrants an exception.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:47, 10 April 2008 (EDT)

:::You have to ask an administrator.  There was a problem with people uploading obscene materials. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 00:42, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

 

:::An exception would be warranted if, for example, the word caught by the filter was not objectionable in the context.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:57, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

 

:You have to ask an administrator.  There was a problem with people uploading obscene materials. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 00:42, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

: An exception would be warranted if, for example, the word caught by the filter was not objectionable in the context.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:57, 11 April 2008 (EDT)

Can anyone do an article on Cong. Larry McDonald, a passenger aboard KAL 007?[[User:BertSchlossberg|BertSchlossberg]] 07:01, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

Can anyone do an article on Cong. Larry McDonald, a passenger aboard KAL 007?[[User:BertSchlossberg|BertSchlossberg]] 07:01, 8 May 2008 (EDT)

==Proposal==

==Proposal==

In short, there's a million ways that this project can grow, and it is more important to me that the conservative cause succeeds than to keep these ideas to myself.  My hope is that someone reading this will take hold of them... [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 17:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

In short, there's a million ways that this project can grow, and it is more important to me that the conservative cause succeeds than to keep these ideas to myself.  My hope is that someone reading this will take hold of them... [[User:Alexander|Alexander]] 17:35, 29 May 2008 (EDT)

My IP address at home appears to have been blocked. Could someone please unblock me? [[User:FOIA|FOIA]] 15:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

My IP address at home appears to have been blocked. Could someone please unblock me? [[User:FOIA|FOIA]] 15:16, 27 June 2008 (EDT)

I understand that [[google]] has problems, but has there ever been thought to developing a "Google Gadget" with a conservapedia news feed?[[User:Mrguido45|Mrguido45]] 20:59, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

I understand that [[google]] has problems, but has there ever been thought to developing a "Google Gadget" with a conservapedia news feed?[[User:Mrguido45|Mrguido45]] 20:59, 9 June 2009 (EDT)

== Evolution Feature on the Main Page ==

== Evolution feature on the Main Page ==

The section of the main page devoted to the Evolution article states that, "In 2006, the prestigious science journal Science reported concerning the United States: "The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year." The study was conducted with 2000 Americans (approximately), selected by pseudo-random digit dialing over the telephone. the study found that the portion of people unsure about evolution has increased in a statistically significant manner. The second finding of the study was that the proportion of people who believe in evolution and creationism have not changed in any statistically significant way (i.e.: That the p-value of the 1985 and 2005 data sets is greater than 0.05 - simply put, that there is not enough detectable difference between the respondents in 1985 and 2005 to make any kind of statement about it). Essentially, the study cited on the main page didn't actually prove that the public belief in evolution is declining. I would request a change to that article to remove the irrelevant citation about a decrease in evolutionary thinking among Americans. [[User: Praboud|Praboud]] 19:52, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

The section of the main page devoted to the Evolution article states that, "In 2006, the prestigious science journal Science reported concerning the United States: "The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year." The study was conducted with 2000 Americans (approximately), selected by pseudo-random digit dialing over the telephone. the study found that the portion of people unsure about evolution has increased in a statistically significant manner. The second finding of the study was that the proportion of people who believe in evolution and creationism have not changed in any statistically significant way (i.e.: That the p-value of the 1985 and 2005 data sets is greater than 0.05 - simply put, that there is not enough detectable difference between the respondents in 1985 and 2005 to make any kind of statement about it). Essentially, the study cited on the main page didn't actually prove that the public belief in evolution is declining. I would request a change to that article to remove the irrelevant citation about a decrease in evolutionary thinking among Americans. [[User: Praboud|Praboud]] 19:52, 15 June 2009 (EDT)

== Referred to as a Methodist ==

== Referred to as a Methodist ==

Hi, I am not sure if this is the right location to ask this, but at the bottom of my user page there is a category section that says "Category: Methodist Conservapedians".  I didn't place that there and it isn't available for editing out when I look at the editable content for my user page.  I only bring this up because I am not a Methodist and I do not wish to mislead anyone into thinking I am.  I do not know who added me to this category or why, or somehow if I accidentally did this myself.  If possible, may I be added to the "Agnostic conservapedians" category instead?  Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 8:42, 20 June 2009 [EDT]

Hi, I am not sure if this is the right location to ask this, but at the bottom of my user page there is a category section that says "Category: Methodist Conservapedians".  I didn't place that there and it isn't available for editing out when I look at the editable content for my user page.  I only bring this up because I am not a Methodist and I do not wish to mislead anyone into thinking I am.  I do not know who added me to this category or why, or somehow if I accidentally did this myself.  If possible, may I be added to the "Agnostic conservapedians" category instead?  Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 8:42, 20 June 2009 [EDT]

::Fixed. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 11:20, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

::Fixed. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 11:20, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

== I might be wrong... ==

== I might be wrong... ==

But I do see quite a bit of bias on Conservapedia. If this is supposed to be "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia" then shouldn't bias be removed? I think that some of the articles are great and others are blatantly biased based upon the authors moral views. I know that some of the topics go against the beliefs of the people who run this site but it isn't a great way to run things. Tolerance of others and their beliefs, no matter what we think of them, is what Conservapedia should be about. Just my opinion and nothing more.

But I do see quite a bit of bias on Conservapedia. If this is supposed to be "The Trustworthy Encyclopedia" then shouldn't bias be removed? I think that some of the articles are great and others are blatantly biased based upon the authors moral views. I know that some of the topics go against the beliefs of the people who run this site but it isn't a great way to run things. Tolerance of others and their beliefs, no matter what we think of them, is what Conservapedia should be about. Just my opinion and nothing more.

==Tau ceti to Tau Ceti==

==Tau ceti to Tau Ceti==

 

I created an article called [[Tau ceti]], but it should be [[Tau Ceti]], is there anyway the name can be reset as the latter? Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:00, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

I created an article called [[Tau ceti]], but it should be Tau Ceti, is there anyway the name can be reset as the latter? Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:00, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

:Yes, there [[Tau Ceti|'''is''']]. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 16:17, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

:Yes, there [[Tau Ceti|'''is''']]. --[[User:TK|'''ṬK''']]_{<small><small>/Admin</small></small>}^{[[User_Talk:TK|/Talk]]} 16:17, 24 June 2009 (EDT)

:: Thanks! -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:22, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

:: Thanks! -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 16:22, 24 June 2009 [EDT]

==Alger Hiss==

==Alger Hiss==

==Kapteyn's star to Kapteyn's Star==

==Kapteyn's star to Kapteyn's Star==

 

The article I created called [[Kapteyn's star]] was created with a lower case s for star, it should be upper case, could someone with the rights change the title to [[Kapteyn's Star]]?  Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 15:00, 8 July 2009 [EDT]

The article I created called [[Kapteyn's star]] was created with a lower case s for star, it should be upper case, could someone with the rights change the title to Kapteyn's Star?  Thank you. -- [[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 15:00, 8 July 2009 [EDT]

== Double Redirects ==

== Double Redirects ==

==I'm having a bit of trouble with some linking==

==I'm having a bit of trouble with some linking==

I'm trying to get the "Weather Report" and "Return to Forever" articles to link to jazz fusion. Instead, it's linking me to another jazz fusion article that I accidentally created and was recently deleted. Any help is much appreciated. [[User:Jdelong11|Jdelong11]]

I'm trying to get the "Weather Report" and "Return to Forever" articles to link to jazz fusion. Instead, it's linking me to another jazz fusion article that I accidentally created and was recently deleted. Any help is much appreciated. [[User:Jdelong11|Jdelong11]]

I'd to change my username to JonathanDP81. I'm standardizing my username across all my websites. [[User:JonathanDP|JonathanDP]] 10:47, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

I'd to change my username to JonathanDP81. I'm standardizing my username across all my websites. [[User:JonathanDP|JonathanDP]] 10:47, 19 June 2010 (EDT)

==User Additions to this site==

==User additions to this site==

Hi, I'm new here and I'm interested in adding some content to Conservapedia, namely in respect to firearm laws.  Just a cursory glace makes me think that users can only edit existing topics?  Am I wrong?

Hi, I'm new here and I'm interested in adding some content to Conservapedia, namely in respect to firearm laws.  Just a cursory glace makes me think that users can only edit existing topics?  Am I wrong?

--[[User:LibGunslinger|LibGunslinger]] 11:28, Dec 10 2009

--[[User:LibGunslinger|LibGunslinger]] 11:28, Dec 10 2009

==Nova==

==Nova==

I believe this is right place to ask this, so here I am.  I want to write an article on the astronomical phenomenon known as a "Nova", however all search on this site for that word is already directed towards "NOVA", a stub on the PBS series of that name.  Should I rebuild that article to focus on the astronomical phenomena as that is what the base definition of a nova means?  Or start a whole new article, such as "nova_(star)"?  Thanks. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 13:18, 28 December 2009 (EST)

I believe this is right place to ask this, so here I am.  I want to write an article on the astronomical phenomenon known as a "Nova", however all search on this site for that word is already directed towards "NOVA", a stub on the PBS series of that name.  Should I rebuild that article to focus on the astronomical phenomena as that is what the base definition of a nova means?  Or start a whole new article, such as "nova_(star)"?  Thanks. --[[User:BMcP|BMcP]] 13:18, 28 December 2009 (EST)

:::It's fine as you did it.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:53, 28 December 2009 (EST)

:::It's fine as you did it.  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 19:53, 28 December 2009 (EST)

==Deleting Account==

==Deleting account==

I'm not sure how it's done but I can't seem to find an option to shutdown/cancel my account. Please, shutdown/cancel my account. I've simply decided to not work on this project anymore. I didn't do many edits but if they all have to go, that's fine.

I'm not sure how it's done but I can't seem to find an option to shutdown/cancel my account. Please, shutdown/cancel my account. I've simply decided to not work on this project anymore. I didn't do many edits but if they all have to go, that's fine.

--[[User:Composer|Composer]] 22:14, 16 February 2010 (EST)

--[[User:Composer|Composer]] 22:14, 16 February 2010 (EST)

==Writing Plan==

==Writing Plan==

User Ed Poor requested a writing plan from me. How exactly do I submit it to him?

User Ed Poor requested a writing plan from me. How exactly do I submit it to him?

Thank you. --[[User:JohnLee|JohnLee]] 16:53, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

Thank you. --[[User:JohnLee|JohnLee]] 16:53, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

: Anyone can post to his talk page: [[User talk:Ed Poor]].  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:00, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

: Anyone can post to his talk page: [[User talk:Ed Poor]].  Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 17:00, 11 October 2010 (EDT)

==Editing Complaint==

==Editing complaint==

 

Someone started a debate page without posting any comments, so I decided to start the discussion. I spent about half an hour writing the post, clicked on save, and was redirected to a page informing me that I didn't have permission to edit it (Probably because it was the first post). And I was unable to go back and copy/paste what I'd written to post it later. Can someone please fix this so that if you click on a page to edit that you can't edit, it tells you straight away and doesn't simply waste your time. Thanks. - JamesCA, 31 July 2011

Someone started a debate page without posting any comments, so I decided to start the discussion. I spent about half an hour writing the post, clicked on save, and was redirected to a page informing me that I didn't have permission to edit it (Probably because it was the first post). And I was unable to go back and copy/paste what I'd written to post it later. Can someone please fix this so that if you click on a page to edit that you can't edit, it tells you straight away and doesn't simply waste your time. Thanks. - JamesCA, 31 July 2011

:And something similar. I recently tried to edit a page because some of the information was out of date, and did not find out until after I tried to save it, that it was locked for only administrators to edit. - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 19:02, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

:And something similar. I recently tried to edit a page because some of the information was out of date, and did not find out until after I tried to save it, that it was locked for only administrators to edit. - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 19:02, 29 August 2011 (EDT)

==Christianity and Politics==

==Christianity and Politics==

I'm wondering what is your take (creators of conservapedia) on the mixing of Christianity and politics? I ask because as a young Christian I'm a little confused about how much focus I should give for politics alongside my faith. Other opinions I've read disregard politics completely within a Christian life, as if Christians in general should simply accept and respect whatever form of government rules over them regardless of the corruption or misguided policies such governments may contribute to the falling of the nation. Please clarify this conundrum for me as I feel uncertain if politics should be in any part of my life. God bless. --[[User:gravis57|gravis57]] 12:32PM, 8 August 2011 (EDT)

I'm wondering what is your take (creators of conservapedia) on the mixing of Christianity and politics? I ask because as a young Christian I'm a little confused about how much focus I should give for politics alongside my faith. Other opinions I've read disregard politics completely within a Christian life, as if Christians in general should simply accept and respect whatever form of government rules over them regardless of the corruption or misguided policies such governments may contribute to the falling of the nation. Please clarify this conundrum for me as I feel uncertain if politics should be in any part of my life. God bless. --[[User:gravis57|gravis57]] 12:32PM, 8 August 2011 (EDT)

:Do you mean with regards to being active in politics, or how much your religious beliefs should influence your political opinions? One suggestion, try coming up with and arguing using non-religious points to support views that stem from religious beliefs. It'll enable you to more effectively argue against those who believe that the Bible alone is not enough to justify moral opinions. It'll also give you a wider range of arguments you can call on when discussing religion, politics or morality, and will enable you to more easily come up with counterpoints to arguments that you've never come across before. For example, if you're arguing against gay marriage, try using points such as family values, and the effect it would have on the institution of marriage, instead of using (only) quotes from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and points based around what God says. - JamesCA (not a creator of conservapedia), August 9 2011

:Do you mean with regards to being active in politics, or how much your religious beliefs should influence your political opinions? One suggestion, try coming up with and arguing using non-religious points to support views that stem from religious beliefs. It'll enable you to more effectively argue against those who believe that the Bible alone is not enough to justify moral opinions. It'll also give you a wider range of arguments you can call on when discussing religion, politics or morality, and will enable you to more easily come up with counterpoints to arguments that you've never come across before. For example, if you're arguing against gay marriage, try using points such as family values, and the effect it would have on the institution of marriage, instead of using (only) quotes from Leviticus and Deuteronomy, and points based around what God says. - JamesCA (not a creator of conservapedia), August 9 2011

==Request for disambiguation==

==Request for disambiguation==

Hi there.  I was hoping to work on the page [[poetry]] as well as other pages about poetic forms.  However, as it exists right now, there is only the page [[form]] which talks about musical form.  I'd like to include a form page about poetry, is there any way someone can disambiguate it into 2 articles, form (music), form (poetry) for me?  Or is it preferred that I just start a new section within the existing form page?  Much love --[[User:RLorain|RLorain]] 16:27, 27 August 2011 (EDT)

Hi there.  I was hoping to work on the page [[poetry]] as well as other pages about poetic forms.  However, as it exists right now, there is only the page [[form]] which talks about musical form.  I'd like to include a form page about poetry, is there any way someone can disambiguate it into 2 articles, form (music), form (poetry) for me?  Or is it preferred that I just start a new section within the existing form page?  Much love --[[User:RLorain|RLorain]] 16:27, 27 August 2011 (EDT)

==Question regarding Debate==

==Question regarding Debate==

Someone posted a new debate semi-recently, [[Debate:Should the United States of America really be counted as a country?]] It was tagged for speedy deletion as it was silly and a non-debate. After a bit, I decided to answer the question, explaining what is necessary for something to be considered a country, and that the US clearly falls into the current definitions. My answer was then copy/pasted onto a new page for the theory of what constitutes a country, and the speedy-deletion tag was removed. No one else has posted on the page, and as the debate is quite silly, is it appropriate for me to delete the page? (And if it is, but I can't, can someone else do it, thanks). - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 03:21, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

Someone posted a new debate semi-recently, [[Debate:Should the United States of America really be counted as a country?]] It was tagged for speedy deletion as it was silly and a non-debate. After a bit, I decided to answer the question, explaining what is necessary for something to be considered a country, and that the US clearly falls into the current definitions. My answer was then copy/pasted onto a new page for the theory of what constitutes a country, and the speedy-deletion tag was removed. No one else has posted on the page, and as the debate is quite silly, is it appropriate for me to delete the page? (And if it is, but I can't, can someone else do it, thanks). - [[User:JamesCA|JamesCA]] 03:21, 14 October 2011 (EDT)

Thanks & have a great day! [[User:Jesseg|Jesseg]] 01:57, 8 February 2013 (EST)

Thanks & have a great day! [[User:Jesseg|Jesseg]] 01:57, 8 February 2013 (EST)

:Jesseq, three answers...

Jesseq, three answers...

::1. Editing is sometimes turned off at night at owner's discretion, but productive newbies are granted night-editing privileges.

:1. Editing is sometimes turned off at night at owner's discretion, but productive newbies are granted night-editing privileges.

::2. The goal of the site is a full, online encyclopedia covering as many subjects as possible, with the intent that the content be family-friendly.  So, you can pretty much contribute in any subject.

:2. The goal of the site is a full, online encyclopedia covering as many subjects as possible, with the intent that the content be family-friendly.  So, you can pretty much contribute in any subject.

::3. Moral issues can carry a conservative slant, but I believe that these issues should also be in a "right vs wrong" slant as well.  We sometimes tell what the liberal side believes in, but we also will tell why that side is wrong at times.

:3. Moral issues can carry a conservative slant, but I believe that these issues should also be in a "right vs wrong" slant as well.  We sometimes tell what the liberal side believes in, but we also will tell why that side is wrong at times.

:So, pick a subject, commence editing, check your sources, and do the very best you can.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 02:25, 8 February 2013 (EST)

So, pick a subject, commence editing, check your sources, and do the very best you can.  [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 02:25, 8 February 2013 (EST)