| Line 9: |
Line 9: |
| | Though Conservapedia originally contained mostly [[history]] articles, it has grown over two years to be a general reference, with information about history, [[math]], [[science]], [[politics]], [[religion]] and other topics. It also contains [[Conservapedia:Debate Topics|debates]], [[essays]] and [[Conservapedia:Index|educational resources]]. | | Though Conservapedia originally contained mostly [[history]] articles, it has grown over two years to be a general reference, with information about history, [[math]], [[science]], [[politics]], [[religion]] and other topics. It also contains [[Conservapedia:Debate Topics|debates]], [[essays]] and [[Conservapedia:Index|educational resources]]. |
| | | | |
| − | In March 2007 it was picked up by the media, and faced a barrage of [[vandalism]] (See [[Essay:Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"|Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"]]) Ever since then, it has continued to grow, and now has [[Special:Statistics|tens of millions of page views]], and enjoys prominence on search engines. | + | In March 2007 it was picked up by the media, and faced a barrage of [[vandalism]] (See [[Essay:Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"|Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"]]). Ever since then, it has continued to grow, and now has [[Special:Statistics|tens of millions of page views]], and enjoys prominence on search engines. |
| | | | |
| | ==Leadership== | | ==Leadership== |
| | + | Unlike Wikipedia, which bills itself as a [[democratic]] system and ends up functioning as a [[mobocracy]], Conservapedia employs a [[Meritocracy|merit system]] and a hierarchy. |
| | | | |
| − | Unlike Wikipedia, which bills itself as a [[democratic]] system and ends up as a [[mobocracy]], Conservapedia employs a [[Meritocracy|merit system]] and a hierarchy.
| + | Andrew Schlafly is the chief administrator and is the most prolific editor, followed by bureaucrats, [[sysop]]s, and regular editors. Editors who contribute substantial content may be promoted to sysop and bureaucrat, or gain extra user rights such as blocking power and the right to upload images. |
| − | | |
| − | Andrew Schlafly is the chief administrator and is the most prolific editor, followed by bureaucrats, [[sysop]]s, and regular editors. Editors who contribute substantial content may be promoted to sysop and bureaucrat, or gain extra user rights such as blocking power and uploading images. | |
| | | | |
| | ==Differences with Wikipedia== | | ==Differences with Wikipedia== |
| − | | + | Conservapedia strives to keep its articles concise, informative, family-friendly, and true to the [[fact]]s, which often back up conservative ideas more than [[liberal]] ones. Rather than claim a neutral point of view and then insert bias, Conservapedia is clear that it seeks to give due credit to conservatism and Christianity. Schlafly said in regard to the point of view issue, "It's impossible for an encyclopedia to be neutral. I mean let's take a point of view, let's disclose that point of view to the reader." <ref>http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8286084</ref> |
| − | Conservapedia strives to keep its articles concise, informative, family-friendly, and true to the [[fact]]s, which often back up conservative ideas more than liberal ones. Rather than claim a neutral point of view and then insert bias, Conservapedia is clear that it seeks to give due credit to conservatism and Christianity. | |
| | | | |
| | Wikipedia articles may contain [[trivia]], [[gossip]], profanity, and even [[Pornography|pornographic]]/sexually explicit images. The latter three are prohibited on Conservapedia and trivia is largely discouraged. | | Wikipedia articles may contain [[trivia]], [[gossip]], profanity, and even [[Pornography|pornographic]]/sexually explicit images. The latter three are prohibited on Conservapedia and trivia is largely discouraged. |
| Line 32: |
Line 30: |
| | *[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] has contributed the majority of content to the extremely popular [[evolution]], [[atheism]], and [[homosexuality]] articles. The first two were featured as articles of the year at Conservapedia. | | *[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] has contributed the majority of content to the extremely popular [[evolution]], [[atheism]], and [[homosexuality]] articles. The first two were featured as articles of the year at Conservapedia. |
| | | | |
| − | *[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] has contributed a large amount of content about the [[art]]s, such as pages on [[literature]], [[sculpture]], and [[painting]]. He created the [[Painting Masterpieces|galleries of artwork]] which are featured on Conservapedia's [[Main_Page|Main page]] as the "masterpiece of the week". His work has helped beautify the encyclopedia. | + | *[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] has contributed a large amount of content about the [[art]]s, such as pages on [[literature]], [[sculpture]], and [[painting]]. He created the [[Painting Masterpieces|galleries of artwork]] which are featured on Conservapedia's [[Main_Page|Main page]] as the "Masterpiece of the Week". His work has helped beautify the encyclopedia. |
| | | | |
| − | *[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] is best known for defending and explaining [[Creationist]] beliefs on Conservapedia. He is also often in conversations in an effort to improve the project. | + | *[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] is best known for defending and explaining [[Creationist]] beliefs on Conservapedia. He is also active in conversations in an effort to improve the project. |
| | | | |
| | *[[User:TK|TK]] has made many substantive contributions since April 9, 2007, and is known for his vigilance against vandals. | | *[[User:TK|TK]] has made many substantive contributions since April 9, 2007, and is known for his vigilance against vandals. |
| Line 51: |
Line 49: |
| | | | |
| | ==Testimonies and Impact== | | ==Testimonies and Impact== |
| − |
| |
| | Conservapedia has been praised and ridiculed in the [[media]], on [[blog]]s, and on rival sites. Critics claim that it contains fringe viewpoints, and supporters note that it simply provides another viewpoint and an alternative to liberal bias. | | Conservapedia has been praised and ridiculed in the [[media]], on [[blog]]s, and on rival sites. Critics claim that it contains fringe viewpoints, and supporters note that it simply provides another viewpoint and an alternative to liberal bias. |
| | | | |
| Line 65: |
Line 62: |
| | | | |
| | ==Educational atmosphere== | | ==Educational atmosphere== |
| − |
| |
| | Due to the existence of essays and debates on Conservapedia, and conventions such as the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|"90/10 rule"]] and the use of real names, Conservapedia successfully fosters an [[education]]al environment. Because liberal bias is not allowed, much information that would be elsewhere censored can be found on Conservapedia; often it is one of the only places to find such information in one place. | | Due to the existence of essays and debates on Conservapedia, and conventions such as the [[Conservapedia:Commandments|"90/10 rule"]] and the use of real names, Conservapedia successfully fosters an [[education]]al environment. Because liberal bias is not allowed, much information that would be elsewhere censored can be found on Conservapedia; often it is one of the only places to find such information in one place. |
| | | | |
| Line 71: |
Line 67: |
| | | | |
| | ==See Also== | | ==See Also== |
| − |
| |
| | *[[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]] | | *[[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]] |
| | *[[Conservapedia:About|About Conservapedia]] | | *[[Conservapedia:About|About Conservapedia]] |