Talk:Examples of Absurdities in Wikipedia

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

I wonder, is this page necessary? I assume the user in question in the only example is the same user who created the page. Also, the link given contradicts the statement. The link says that the user was blocked for being a persistent sock puppet, and no blocking discussion that I found centers around the fact that you are a Christian, despite the removal of that information from your page. HelpJazz 16:32, 26 November 2007 (EST)

One of the complaints about Hornetman16 (besides dozens of uses of images against Wikipedia policies, his sock puppetry, and his tendency to make false edits to pages) was that his user page looked, more or less, like a myspace page. The problem wasn't specifically his statement that he is a Christian, but that it didn't need to be formatted in < big> tags. Other eyesores were removed from his user page as well and he was chastised multiple times under WP:NOT#MYSPACE [1]. There are thousands of Christian users with overtly Christian user pages on Wikipedia whose accounts are still active. - Solstice

Indeed, the claim that he was banned for being a Christian is, at best, clearly not the only reason, and likely not a reason at all. I've just listed it for deletion. Philip J. Rayment 23:37, 28 December 2007 (EST)
Fine, but are atheists banned in a similar manner? A series of Christian edits will get one banned on Wikipedia, while a series of atheistic edits will get one promoted there.--Aschlafly 23:40, 28 December 2007 (EST)
Neither, because he clearly wasn't banned for the sole purpose of being a Christian. He was banned for sockpuppetry. I've seen many Wikipedia user pages, including those of administrators, proclaim that the user is a Christian. DanH 23:42, 28 December 2007 (EST)
As does my Wikipedia user page (although I'm a "normal" editor, not an administrator).
The problem with Wikipedia (well, one of its problems), is that the overt Christians, and particularly the creationists, are subjected to abuse and harassment. What happens next depends on how they react to that, particularly given that they often get 'pounced on', so that they feel that they are a lone voice in a sea of bigotry. Many react badly, firing abuse back, losing their temper, etc. This is what gets them banned. If, however, they keep their cool and put reasoned arguments, they will still get harassment and abuse in return, but they won't get banned. At least going on my observations and experience.
Philip J. Rayment 00:13, 29 December 2007 (EST)