User talk:Aschlafly/Archive46

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

This User Has 23,291 Edits, and Had 1426 Points in Contest4!

iGoogle Gadget

Hi Andrew, I have made a Google XML search gadget. I have yet to submit it to Google and wait for your approval first. The coding is reviewable here gadget. If accepted, I relinquish all rights of ownership to Conservapedia.-- 50 star flag.png jp 02:40, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

Although I know that Google has "gadgets" for your desktop or web-page, I don't know a lot about them, and I suspect Andy mightn't either. so perhaps you could explain a bit more about what this one does, who would use it, and so on. Philip J. Rayment 03:12, 4 October 2008 (EDT)
Here is a page with gadgets from the competition gadgets --Jpatt 20:32, 6 October 2008 (EDT)
I will not be discouraged if you say no, just tryng to further the cause.--Jpatt 05:18, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
This is a great idea iGoogle gadget could be useful to a lot of people and may increase traffic to the site. CPWebmaster 17:41, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Request for 24 hour access

Andy; I request 24 hour access. Normally, my available times for CP are before 8AM and after about 3PM my time. The later time is after you have “closed” for the night. Any access between those times is usually fleeting. If you check my contributions for the last 2 months or so you will find I am averaging over 400 words of ‘’’new’’’ information a day, either on articles I have created, or substantial improvements to others. You will also notice that nearly all my “talk” is creative.

I cannot promise my contributions will increase markedly, but at least it will give me time to browse randomly and fix those errors I find in my areas of expertise – something I just don’t have time for these days - and where in the past I have frequently found and deleted old pieces of vandalism.

Prior to my going off ill in September 2007 I had 24 hour access and blocking rights. My attitude to this project has not changed since then.

Please see my user page for a summary of recent edits. AlanE 18:45, 2 October 2008 (EDT)

I support this request. --User:Joaquín Martínez, talk 12:01, 4 October 2008 (EDT)
I'm looking into this. Thanks for your comment, Joaquin.--Aschlafly 21:19, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

Over a week has passed and I have not been favoured with a reply. AlanE 14:36, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

The verdict is not yet affirmative. These privileges are earned over time, and the case is not yet overwhelming here. Hopefully a stronger case for it will develop.--Aschlafly 14:45, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
So be it. I wonder, though, what has changed since June last year when I was given full access and even blocking rights. Are my articles now of less worth? I don't want "privileges". I want to continue doing what I am doing, at more or less the same rate, which is increasingly difficult as the weather warms up down here and family and house and garden commitments increase. My not being able to edit in the late afternoon/evening when my health usually forces me back into my chair, is to the detriment of CP. AlanE 15:41, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
What time is now from where you edit?
Nothing has changed in our policy since the beginning. We do have more knowledge now than in June of last year, our site has grown enormously, and we could have been mistaken then or even now with respect to your account. To quote Emerson, and please don't be offended by this, "consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." Improvement results in inconsistencies, for example. The point is to be right and improve, not necessarily consistent.--Aschlafly 16:02, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Sorry, I was away preparing breakfast when the above came in. It is nearly 7:30 AM here. I live in southern Tasmania.

On the other thing, all I can point to are my articles. I have been "doing" things no one else seemed to be interested in. The European discovery and exploration of Australia. The Portuguese expansion into the Indian Ocean. The continuation of the medieval kings with nearly all the resultant red links "fixed". Classical music. I am in the middle of the Anglo-Saxon kings at the moment...filling the template. And this morning I started a word document on "Prester John".

It's up to you to see whether my articles from 2007 and 2008 show improvement...I can only ask that you read some. It is now 7:54 AM. (My typing is glacial.) Cheers. AlanE 16:54, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

I should explain...I have been getting up about 4 - 4:30, working on CP stuff almost exclusively until about 7 when the rest of the family start to stir. I can spend some time at the computer after that but it's full of interruptions. By about 9 - 9:30 I have to leave and can't get back on 'til 3 or 4 in the afternoon. There are days when I can be here all day, but they are thankfully rare...they're days when I am not mobile.

Since Monday I have done 10 (I think) articles. That's all. BUT, they have averaged 300 words of new information each. (I now have to leave.)AlanE 18:26, 10 October 2008 (EDT)


Even though I was ignored the last time, I am resubmitting these petitions to you in the hope that you will look at them and consider the fact that they are signed by 19 and 28 users respectively (at least as I post this). All of the users that signed these realize that you have no obligation work the petitions into the rules of Conservapedia, but it would be reassuring for them that a little bit of democracy exists on this site and that the opinion of the average editor matters.

Thank you, FernoKlumpLook at this petition! 20:53, 4 October 2008 (EDT)

I'll check it out. Thanks.--Aschlafly 21:19, 4 October 2008 (EDT)


Hello, I was wondering what the numbers (preceded by a "-" or "+" symbol and colored red or green) in the Recent Changes page indicated. Are these a count of the letters that were deleted/added to a particular article? Or just a general point system for one of the contests? I'm not really sure what they are meant to say about a user, but perhaps a short blurb at the top of the page could explain? Thanks Andy.Mcliff 09:28, 5 October 2008 (EDT)

They are the number of bytes (I believe) deleted or added in the edit. They are a standard feature of recent versions of the MediaWiki software. Philip J. Rayment 09:32, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
Oh, okay. Thanks for the help, Philip J. Rayment. Mcliff 09:35, 5 October 2008 (EDT)
If I'm not mistaken, I'm pretty sure they indicate the number of characters/letters added or removed in total. This includes spaces. Jallen 22:38, 7 October 2008 (EDT)


Your American history course has some...interesting elements. For example, the fact that students' answers--and grades--are viewable by anyone and everyone who cares to look at them. No privacy whatsoever. Then there's the fact that every one of them seems to earn a high A.

At the university where I teach, either of these things--the lack of privacy, and the grade inflation--would be basis for a review of my teaching and potentially for dismissal. I wonder if you might comment on why you've chosen these approaches.--Jknott 08:27, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

We have prayer and honor in our homeschooling community, in contrast to the university culture. A student can leave his wallet on a classroom table and no one will steal the money inside. That's not true in a university these days, unfortunately.
I have not assigned any letter grades, and obviously numerical grades would have to be curved. The multiple choice scores will be as low as the homeworks are high.--Aschlafly 08:33, 6 October 2008 (EDT)
Jknott was a sock of blocked users Dknotsworth, Jknowles, Jregret, Jcane, Hgwells, Jbonham, Gwales, Johnnywayne. Jknott, his other socks and his IP have been blocked. --DeanStalk 08:56, 6 October 2008 (EDT)
Dang, thats one persistent liberal! --PhilipV 14:41, 5 November 2008 (EST)

Site problems

Mr. Schlafly, I tried to block a new user for an inappropriate name (F*******) but I got a message that the user was already blocked by you even though it doesn't show up in the recent changes. It looks like there might still be a technical problem after the earlier outage. BrianCo 18:53, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

He was blocked. Thanks.--Aschlafly 21:59, 6 October 2008 (EDT)

Philip Berg

Could you take a look at the headline The motion by the DNC to dismiss the lawsuit brought by Philip Berg against Barack Obama et al is denied. ? I don't know much about the U.S. judiciary system, so I ask you as an expert: Is this true? To my reading, the given link only shows, that Ph. Berg wants the dismission to be denied. --BRichtigen 09:47, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

Removed the article per DeanS talk page. --DeanStalk 17:55, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

please help

I've been blocked three times and I don't know why, once as Opcn I was given the reason of not having made an edit in a long while (never told I had too) then as Opcnup and Opcndown because I didn't use my first name and last initial (I was never told to) and there is absolutely no way to get a hold of the admin after a block has been put on you, its very frustrating. I created Opcnup because I got tired after months of searching for a way to get in contact with anyone and finding none, then I was banned in minutes, I created opcndown to ask the admin why and that was banned in minutes too. Please you need a way to contact the admin after you have been banned or if not you should remove the part of the ban where it tells you to get in contact with the admin. I think my home IP address has also been banned, I would liek that lifted too please. --Brendanw 17:48, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

Since you first joined there has been a policy change that you should register with your first name and last initial. I don't know why you were blocked for not editing, maybe it was thought that the account was derelict. As you are editing here with Brendaw you can keep that name and I will lift any IP blocks on the other names but they will still be disabled. We don't want to discourage keen editors so I hope you can edit more frequently than you did. You mentioned that you were a skeptic on your previous user page so I should remind you that inappropriate edits, vandalism or changing article content to a liberal POV will merit a block. Also, note that we discourage too much chit-chat on talk pages so be aware of the 90/10 rule. BrianCo 18:02, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
Thank you, two suggestions for you if you will listen. Make that policy on user name selection visible by the area where user names are entered in registration and put up an email address for users to send grievances to rather than requiring that they send them to sysops when they can't send anything to the sysops because they are banned from editing pages. Once again Thanks --Brendanw 18:13, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
The account creation page does recommend the use of first name and last initial. As for blocking, some editors/sysops do not have email enabled while others do. You can contact any other administrator to appeal a block if there is no available email address for the person who blocked you. BrianCo 18:21, 7 October 2008 (EDT)
Very well put, BrianCo. Brendanw, I welcome your edits and look forward to any insights you have. Let's stop belaboring the obvious (such as why real names are preferable to the idiocy that reins at Wikipedia), and let's start learning something worthwhile.--Aschlafly 19:28, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

Just to clarify, first name and last initial is not a requirement, except in the case that a user causes problems, in which case we then make it a requirement. But as BrianCo mentioned, a username based on your real name is recommended on the registration page. And nobody was "belaboring the obvious" (in this discussion): nobody questioned why we have this recommendation/policy. Philip J. Rayment 22:07, 7 October 2008 (EDT)

American History Midterm Exam

I wonder if you could explain why the boys' version of the exam will have 18% more questions than the girls' version? Will the grading be different as well?--Brossa 08:50, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

The purpose is to minimize competition between boys and girls, as part of the Essay:Rules of Chivalry for Students. Some of the questions will be different also, and it will not be possible to compare grading easily.--Aschlafly 10:38, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
This sounds suspiciously like a case of affirmative action.JonC 10:41, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
If it's going to be so difficult to compare grading, how do you intend to grade the tests? And won't they just compare the final results anyway? If a boy gets an A and a girl gets an A-, can't the boy still brag about doing better? And won't he even be able to use the excuse that his test was "harder" to further boast? KPickering 10:44, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Wow, JonC is clueless about what affirmative action is. He can learn here, if he has an open mind.
KPickering, I don't assign letter grades to exams.--Aschlafly 10:48, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
OK, I assume you assign some sort of grade. If it's number grades then a male getting a 94% could still brag to a female getting a 93% (assuming you round off to 3 points for each male question and 3.5 for each female), or whatever the final grades may be. KPickering 10:54, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
It's a partly different exam with different timing per question. I assume an idiot could compare apples to oranges, but that doesn't make the comparison persuasive or meaningful.--Aschlafly 11:12, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Well, people can and do make these "apples to oranges" comparisons all the time. Do you really think a boy who gets one wrong will not be able to brag to a girl who gets 4 wrong, even if the tests were different? People make much less equivalent comparisons all the time. Take a person who has a 3.4 GPA in chemistry from Yale vs. a person with a 3.0 GPA in biology from Michigan State. Your scenario sets up competition, as the boys, regardless of their actual scores, will be able to claim that the girls took an easier test, simply by having to answer more questions. KPickering 11:29, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Unless I misremember, you said elsewhere that final grading would be on a curve, in which case every student is in competition with every other student, regardless of gender. Or will you be grading male and female students on different curves, such that a girl could get a higher grade than a boy (or vice versa) for the same final point tally? At any rate, I look forward to seeing how the test questions are tailored to the two groups.--Brossa 11:16, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

Why are you so worried about your students fighting with one another? -DrSandstone 11:31, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

I am completely against structuring the test so that boys have a different test than girls. Healthy competition is good, Mr. Schlafly. With all due respect, it actually gives the student more incentive to do well on the test and study harder. And the harder they study, the more they will learn. Changing the test also eliminates the student's right to be proud when they do better than others. However, if it becomes a problem, and that student begins to brag, then, naturally, they'll need to be talked to. But by changing the test, students can say that they got a bad grade because 'their test was harder' or 'different', when really, they didn't study all that hard, because they knew they would have an excuse. Making the tests different will also cause other problem. Suppose someone does not do as well as someone else on the test. they might say: 'well my test was harder'. The other person might respond: 'no it wasn't' and so many fights could break out in this manner. The only way to get rid of competition taking place out of selfishness or hate is to talk to that student, tell their parent, or something of the sort. ~BethTalk2ME 11:39, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Thanks for your enlightening comment. I'm a big supporter of competition and its powerful benefits. But we have plenty of that within the subgroups of boys and girls. It adds nothing, and actually detracts a great deal, to add competition between boys and girls.--Aschlafly 12:13, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
We also can see all the homeworks and the grades as we do it online. What's the difference? ~BethTalk2ME 12:34, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
The difference is that the exams will count more, be more competitive in nature, and everyone will participate.--Aschlafly 12:37, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
Well, you're the teacher, you make the decisions; I will submit. ~BethTalk2ME 12:45, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
(pained, really pained) Andrew, are you saying, or implying, that girls can't do history in the same way as boys? Maybe, you will ask the girls harder questions, and the boys' test will be easier, since they are too focused on sports at this age? My last girlfriend (BA, MA, PhD, MLS), and still a highly valued friend, is a published historian, and so maybe I understand where you are coming from. The boys need a simpler test, with more, easier, questions, since the girls might embarrass them on an "even playing field"? I am so confused with your goals at this point. Human 00:02, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Single-gender submarines in our military must really pain you, Human!--Aschlafly 12:45, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
There are certainly issues still being worked out with integrated ships in the Navy, but the enlisted advancement exams are the same for men and women. Corry 13:30, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
No, they aren't. You've fallen for another liberal falsehood. The physical tests are different.--Aschlafly 17:00, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
You're absolutely correct in that the physical fitness tests are different. The written advancement exams that enlisted people take, however, are the same for men and women. In training schools, academic tests are the same. Qualification requirements are the same. Corry 17:14, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Corry, the physical tests are the whole ball game. Next you're going start telling me about the academic tests required of professional athletes!--Aschlafly 18:21, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Like the Wonderlic Personnel Test used by the NFL?--Brossa 09:40, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
Not necessarily- it depends on what you do. Let's take a storekeeper on a surface ship. The physical requirements of the job are different than, say, a Marine infantry corporal. In the case of the storekeeper, passing the physical fitness test is important, but getting a perfect score wouldn't be near as beneficial for advancement as blowing away the advancement exam. Depending on the job, the physical fitness test, while important, can be very far from the whole ball game. Corry 18:30, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
So to the point I initially intended to make- you bring up the submarine service, which does not include women, as an example of different standards for men and women. This example is dubious, however, in that Navy advancement exams for the enlisted servicemembers are the same for both genders, although there are jobs that women are not allowed to fill. Similarly, the AP exams, SAT II, and college courses (although there may be outliers) for which you aim to prepare your students do not have different exams or scoring systems for men and women. By giving your students a different set of standards you are not making their preparation for college as realistic as possible, and in that you risk doing them a great disservice. Corry 16:12, 13 October 2008 (EDT)

Forrest Gump

No, I'm serious. The movie Forrest Gump didn't slate conservatives as having any sort of disability. It was a story of coming of age, understanding the world, and Forrest Gump finding his place in it. No political motive. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grapes (talk)

Forrest Gump is unquestionably a liberal movie, including even its offensive exclamation, "Jesus H. Christ"! If you don't accept that it is liberal, then you need to open your mind more.--Aschlafly 20:17, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
I thought that movie had some conservative themes. Forrest Gump is very conservative and is very successful (with his shrimping company and others), while Jenny is very liberal and becomes addicted to drugs, has an abusive boyfriend at one point, etc. FernoKlumpLook at this petition! 10:36, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Also, Lt. Dan's life is miserable until he finds God. FernoKlumpLook at this petition! 10:39, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Very true. Unless I'm forgetting something, the "Jesus H. Christ" exclamation comes from Lt. Dan during his "lost" period. Once he gets right with God, you never hear him say anything like that.
The pervading message of the movie is how two people can both be in constant motion, but one (the ostensibly smart and worldly one) is wayward and purposeless while the other, while superficially simple, leads a life of purpose and conviction. I'm really surprised to hear that anyone who has seen the movie thinks it is "unquestionably" liberal. Aziraphale 11:25, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
The movie features one silly liberal theme after another. It portrays an America shaped by issues of racism and JFK rather than one of conservative values. Like it if you insist, but there's no doubting it's a liberal movie.--Aschlafly 12:44, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
It doesn't feature them positively, however. The main character is detached from those events most of the time, and when he is involved in them peripherally his disdain/disaffection/nonplussed-ness is telling. Take his appearance at an anti-Vietnam demonstration. Yes, he's "in it", but he doesn't comprehend what they possibly could be talking about.
I do like the movie, although less and less as years go by (it just feels dated to me for whatever reason), and it's liberalness can be doubted with tremendous ease, what with it not being true and all. Aziraphale 13:03, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Aziraphale, you deny liberal bias in stereotypical fashion. In fact, "Forest Gump" features one incident of liberal preaching after another; it features an unabashedly liberal actor, Tom Hanks, who would have had control over the script; and it includes an offensive slogan against Jesus Christ. Oh, one more thing: liberals absolutely gushed about the movie. Now if you don't think that's liberal, then I wonder what movies you would admit are liberal.--Aschlafly 18:19, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Aschlafly, I realize you talk to a lot of people here and are constantly inundated by what I'm sure you see as gnats buzzing around you while you try to get things done, so I'm not really bothered that you're completely mis-characterizing me - you don't have the time. That's fine, but we need to either get serious or end the conversation. I've taken your open-mindedness test, at your urging. I've always answered your questions forthrightly. Give me whatever litmus test you'd like of movies and I'll tell you what I think of them.
All that being said, I'm confident that you are mistaken about Forrest Gump. Not intentionally; I'm not accusing you of anything other than misjudging a movie that you haven't seen through to its conclusion. To take your points in order:
*Whatever characters may "preach" in a liberal manner is undercut by how their lives turn out. No successful character exists in a liberal atmosphere in the movie.
*The idea that a liberal actor cannot be involved in a project that doesn't espouse his values is absurd on the face of it. It's acting. Therefore, his involvement proves nothing.
*Yes, the movie contains "an offensive slogan against Jesus Christ." If you want to have a conversation about whether offensive language cannot be condoned in the service of art, we can do that, but it certainly isn't a settled point in the minds of all conservatives and Christians. The offensive slogan is used precisely to help depict the lost, misguided nature of the speaking character. Is that really inconceivable to you? I see the movies on Trinity Broadcasting, and they certainly don't pull any punches in depicting the "Before" characters in one of their "Before and After" style programs.
*I fail to see what "liberals gush[ing]" about a movie has to do with anything. It has not been my experience that registered Democrats only like liberal-leaning media and cannot abide any conservative-leaning media, nor has it been my experience that registered Republicans choose the reverse.
TerryH tried making the point some time ago that no real conservative watches commercial TV; he eventually dropped it as the absurdity of the point became clear. It would take some time to dig up, but I'm sure you could find it in the Main Page talk archives.
Regards, Aziraphale 22:06, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
Aziraphale, your obsession with this borders on the absurd. Answer my question and tell me if you will admit that any movies are liberal, and which ones. You're not going to fool anyone here into embracing "Forest Gump," but perhaps you can at least display an acknowledgment that many, and probably most, modern movies are markedly liberal, particularly when featuring liberal ideologues as actors as "Forest Gump" does.--Aschlafly 22:23, 9 October 2008 (EDT)
as Aziraphale as already pointed out, the fact that Hanks is a liberal does not mean the movie is liberal. Surely you do regard "Saving Private Ryan," which also starred Hanks, as a liberal film.--Saxplayer 13:35, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
Nor does it mean that it is not. And Forrest Gump is designed to be offensive to conservatives. Bugler 13:37, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
How exactly is it offensive to conservatives? It is clear, by the arguments made by Aziraphale and Fernoklump, that liberalism, if anything, is insulted in the movie Forrest Gump. This argument concerning the supposed liberalism based on Hanks' presence in the film is absurd, not the complex and well-thought-out points from Aziraphale.--JArneal 14:29, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
First admit that many modern movies are liberal in ideology, give some examples, and then let's discuss from there. Otherwise you'd just be another liberal who denies that liberal ideology even exists, and any discussion about specific movies would be pointless.--Aschlafly 14:33, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

(unindent) Sorry for my delayed response, I traveled here to the East Coast yesterday for my parent's 50th Anniversary. I have some quiet time at the moment, however, sooo...

I will answer your question: yes, of course I think there are many liberally-biased movies. Which ones? Well, unlike some here I'm only going to speak about movies I've seen. So, without spending too much time on this (and stipulating your definition of liberalism to save time): The Day After Tomorrow. Brown Bunny. Baby Mama. The Godfather trilogy (I'm looking forward to seeing the restoration next week when I get back to Seattle). Many, many, more, undoubtedly, but I'm not going to waste time when I already concede your basic point.

Having said that, I'm surprised at how much effort you're expending defending your position on a movie of which you have seen so little. I'm not a liberal (we've had this discussion before, check your own archives so we don't both waste time going 'round and 'round, please) and I'm not going to stick up for a liberal agenda that is not mine. Forrest Gump has a pro-conservative message and, while it portrays many aspects of the liberal lifestyle (again, stipulating your definition) it also shows the characters who embrace that lifestyle destroyed repeatedly. I don't know how much better a case you'd want to see made for the conservative position. I've acknowledged my open mind repeatedly, and demonstrated it on many issues; surely this is a situation in which you should keep one? Aziraphale 15:11, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

You're in denial about liberal ideology in movies, so this discussion has become a waste of time. "The Godfather" is your example of a liberal movie? You've got to be kidding. You essentially deny that any of the leading liberal movies are, in fact, liberal. So of course you're not going to admit it about Forest Gump.
I don't know why you say I haven't seen Forest Gump. I watched as much of its liberal propaganda as I could, before moving on to something more worthwhile. The movie idolizes one liberal icon after another. When you admit the liberal ideology in movies in a candid manner, then this discussion might be worth picking up again. Otherwise, please enjoy your family time.--Aschlafly 15:22, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Why should anyone have to name liberal movies for you? The discussion is about Forrest Gump, not what other movies are about. And how could you say that the movie idolizes liberal icons? I thought that that point has been made! The liberal characters in the movie are completely miserable until they embrace conservative values. You must watch the movie all the way through to realize this. You could make a good argument if the movie ended one-and-a-half hours before it did. But in the latter half of the movie, the liberal icons you speak of get their lives out of the gutter by following conservative values.--JArneal 15:35, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Arizaphale: "...I think there are many liberally-biased movies. ... I ... concede your basic point.".
Andy: "You're in denial about liberal ideology in movies".
Huh? How is that being "in denial"?
I haven't seen the Godfather movies, so I can't comment on them (I was never enraptured with the idea of watching movies that apparently focussed, presumably positively, on an organised crime leader; to me, that would make the movies "liberal", but of course as I said, I haven't seen them), and it's some time since I've seen Forrest Gump, and that only once or perhaps twice, so my memory of it is not that great, but from what I do remember it's true that the character (Gump) who appears to be out of step with society in holding to various "conservative" (I would perhaps say "Christian") values is the one who, in the end, is shown to be the more genuine person. Few movies would not have some "liberal" values and some "conservative" values, and I'm not denying for one moment that Forrest Gump (the movie) may well have some "liberal" values, but to dismiss it as a "liberal" movie seems to me to be somewhat one-eyed.
Arizaphale, I saw a comment from Andy that indicated that he had not seen the movie all the way through, not that he had seen very "little" of it. (Although perhaps he has indicated differently elsewhere?)
Philip J. Rayment 21:56, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
To Andy - you on July 22, 2007: "This is tricky, because Gump is an idiot. I can't tell from the quoted excerpts if the movie is mocking religion or not. Maybe I need to watch the whole movie. However, I tried that once and for reasons already explained (including its anti-intellectualism and liberal sermonizing) I found something better do after watching the first half-hour or so. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 21:28, 22 July 2007 (EDT)" I contend that your 30 minute viewing was insufficient for you to grasp the movie. I'm not saying you're dumb, or anything of the sort. I'm saying you've got the movie wrong, and at the same time offering you a (pretty compelling, imo) reason for why.
As for my choice of The Godfather, a) it wasn't my only example, and b) I've said repeatedly that I agree that a pro-liberal environment, like Hollywood, is likely to produce many pro-liberal movies. Why would I waste time arguing a point that you and I are in agreement about? How is that not a waste of time? Unless you think it's that important for me not just to agree with you but to prove I agree with you. That's just petty, and I won't do it. Would you care to actually address the possibility, aka demonstrate an open mind, that you could perhaps be wrong about Forrest Gump? I've been invited to demonstrate all sorts of things in this conversation, fair's fair.
To Philip - see the above, plus note the 142 minute running time of Forrest Gump, according to imdb. I'm not married to the word "little" but don't feel it's inappropriate at +/- 20% of the movie.
Regards, Aziraphale 00:04, 12 October 2008 (EDT)
I agree "so little" is fair for only 30 out of 142 minutes. I hadn't seen or remembered that comment. Philip J. Rayment 03:32, 12 October 2008 (EDT)

Image of a water molecule

Hi, I contacted you a while ago about SVG images, and apparently Conservapedia does support SVG files.

I have created a diagram of a water molecule, but I am not 100% sure how to get it to you so that you can upload it. SVG files are essentially XML code, so if you want, and it is not too much trouble, I can put the code somewhere and then you can copy/paste it to Notepad, save it as something like "water.svg" and then upload it. I would just email you the file, but apparently MediaWiki won't let me attach files. Samd 20:58, 8 October 2008 (EDT)

As Andy is often busy with other stuff, I suggest that you e-mail me, BrianCo, or DeanS, and put the XML text in the e-mail. Alternatively, paste the XML text somewhere on Conservapedia (e.g. user:SamD/svg-pic) and someone can save it as an .svg file and upload it. Philip J. Rayment 21:25, 8 October 2008 (EDT)
I have dabbled a bit with SVGs using Inkscape. I think if you just attach the file to an email then one of us can upload it, it doesn't need to be saved as xml text. My email is enabled so send me a quik note to establish an off-site dialog and then you can forward it to me. (I don't like posting my email address in an open forum because of spam). BrianCo 07:04, 10 October 2008 (EDT)
This has already been taken care of. See my talk page. However, the .svg file didn't work for some reason. Philip J. Rayment 08:17, 10 October 2008 (EDT)


Hi Mr. Schlafly--

EricBowman is a parodist--please remove him.

DuncanB 15:14, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Done. Thanks for the alert catch!--Aschlafly 15:18, 10 October 2008 (EDT)

Block request

Mr. Schlafly, I recently blocked a user who registered with the name User:Aschlaflie and am now having my mailbox flooded with vile spam and hate mail. Although I have blocking rights it does not extend to prohibiting e-mails. I don't want to disable my e-mail as that would prohibit legitimate users contacting me. Could you please block this user's ability to send e-mails on top of his" editing block? Thank you. BrianCo 09:57, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

This moronic vandal is probably a product of liberal ideology. I've expanded his block as you suggested. Thanks.--Aschlafly 10:09, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Thanks, my mailbox was completely filled and I think that I have lost several important e-mails which were bounced because of it. BrianCo 10:19, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
When emails bounce, senders are notified of the bouncing so someone would probably let you know. You could also complain to the vandal's server, law enforcement and, if appropriate, his school or employer, and I can get IP information for you to follow up if you like.--Aschlafly 10:52, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

Homeschool Courses

Mr. Schlafly, I would like to unify all of your course materials so that they are more accessible to students. I am thinking along the lines of a Homeschooling Portal from where all the course lectures, homework questions and term lists may be accessed. If you are happy with that perhaps could you unlock American History Homework One, American History Homework Two, American History Homework Three, World_History_Lecture_One, World_History_Lecture_Three, American_Government_Lecture_Six, American_Government_Lecture_Eight, American_Government_Lecture_Ten, American_Government_Lecture_Eleven, American_Government_Lecture_Twelve, American_Government_Lecture_Thirteen so that I can add categories and improved navigation. Thanks. BrianCo 11:32, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

Good suggestion, but I don't to move them in a way that changes their location. People can find them now, and moves should wait until between semesters.--Aschlafly 12:01, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
I wasn't suggesting that they be moved, just that by categorizing them and adding navigation links it is easier to move around them. For instance, one of the American History lectures is categorized as History rather than American History, and by adding a DEFAULTSORT they appear in numerical order instead of alphabetical order in the category listings. If I could address these issues then I think it would improve access to them. Perhaps they could be moved into a homeschool namespace between semesters but at the moment I'm only interested in applying some uniformity to them. A homeschool portal by itself wouldn't require the moving of pages it would just be a central location from where everything could be accessed. BrianCo 13:14, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Done as suggested. Thanks.--Aschlafly 13:26, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Much appreciated, I'll see what I can do. BrianCo
Could you also please unlock American Government Homework One, American Government Homework Two, American Government Homework Three, American Government Homework Four, American Government Lecture Seven, American Government Lectures. Thanks. BrianCo 15:52, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Done as suggested. Thanks!--Aschlafly 16:02, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Could you also unlock Writing Homework One and American History Homework Five. Thanks. BrianCo 18:59, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
Done. You're making them look beautiful! Thanks.--Aschlafly 19:18, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

New wikiproject

I was wondering if you could start a new wikiproject, Wikiproject Sports. Several of the sports-related articles are lacking/nonexistant. Let me know (on my talk page, if you would), whether or not this is a good idea/feasible. Thank you in advance. JY23 12:28, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

I don't see the educational value in that. I'm more interested in learning and growing. Thanks anyway.--Aschlafly 12:35, 11 October 2008 (EDT)


You probably noticed, but just in case you have your e-mail open and not Conservapedia, someone's creating a lot of accounts again. This is probably a useless warning, but I thought it might be helpful LiamG 14:09, 11 October 2008 (EDT)


There's no American History Homework Six?? ~BethTalk2ME 18:37, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

There will be ... next week! This week's homework (which is due next Thursday) is week 5.--Aschlafly 19:18, 11 October 2008 (EDT)
oh...;-( my bad...False hopes :( ~BethTalk2ME 21:46, 11 October 2008 (EDT)

Happy Columbus Day

Mr. Schlafly will you be opening the site for general editing today? The database appears to be locked for ordinary editors. BrianCo 13:33, 13 October 2008 (EDT)

Editing has been opened. --DeanStalk 13:41, 13 October 2008 (EDT)

Critical Thinking in Math

  • Is this ever going to happen? It's now been over a year since it was scheduled to start . . . -CSGuy 19:15, 13 October 2008 (EDT)
I've found greater interest in American History right now, so it's taken first priority. It's unfortunate that some who have math skills seem resistant to looking at math critically.--Aschlafly 22:17, 13 October 2008 (EDT)


Hi! The naming conventions of this site have changed slightly since I was last here. In deference to this, I'd like to request that you rename my account. Is that possible? Thanks, Jellyfish 10:01, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

It's certainly possible - in fact, it's easy to do and Mr. Schlafly has done this a number of times for editors. You might want to mention the new name you want to use here so he can "respond" and "act" at the same time, though. Human 14:22, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Jellyfish, give me your new name here and I will create the account and move your files. Thanks for suggesting this.--Aschlafly 18:39, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
I'd like "HKing", please :) My internet access is very inconsistent at the moment, so if there's a problem with the transition I'm afraid I might take a while to get back to you. Jellyfish 10:11, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
Done as requested. All your files have been moved, and your old username (Jellyfish) is blocked as recommended by the software. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 10:16, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
Thanks! That was quick! HKing 10:17, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

Site changes

Mr. Schlafly, since the upgrade in the MediaWiki software there are now double boxes around the categories at the bottom of article pages. I think it looks a bit ugly. Could you have a look at the formatting? Thanks. BrianCo 16:42, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

Brian, thanks for your comment, but I don't see the problem. For example, could you describe it specifically with respect to the entry on faith?--Aschlafly 17:28, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
Regarding something else that changed in the upgrade- is there any way to bring back the old arithmetic problem anti-bot device for external links as opposed to the wavy word device (I don't know the technical terms)? Corry 17:44, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
Corry, it's called a CAPTCHA. Aschlafly, the problem is at the bottom around the categories (in the case of faith, it's around "categories: religion | philosophy"). There's a grey box around them, then a grey box around the grey box, but there's a weird space between the tops of the two boxes. Hope that helps! LiamG 17:53, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

As LiamG says, there are now two boxes around the categories when there used to be only one. BrianCo 18:02, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

The CAPTCHA is enough that I will probably avoid adding external links. Can we change it back, or (preferably) add a new user right to skip the CAPTCHA's? The new one is very annoying and very hard to read. HelpJazz 20:08, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

REPLY TO ABOVE: Thanks for your comments. Brian, I set my preferences long ago and those boxes don't show up on mine. So you can get rid of them by adjusting your preferences. HelpJazz, I don't see the CAPTCHA that you're complaining about either. Indeed, I don't think any registered user would see it.--Aschlafly 20:44, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

the CAPTCHA appears when creating a new page with links . Its harder than the math question to use but should be more secure. Markr 20:50, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

If it works like the old CAPTCHA, then sysops don't ever see it, but all other registered editors do. I can creat a snapshot... but I can't upload it. HelpJazz 20:53, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
It came with the upgrade in the MediaWiki software. I'm open to turning it off for linking purposes ... if anyone can suggest how to do that.--Aschlafly 21:11, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

The double box appears when the default "Conserv" skin is selected in Preferences, but not with the Monobook skin. I haven't tried other skins than those two. There could be something in the CSS causing this. I could investigate when I get time, but user:Jallen may be the best one to look into this.

As HelpJazz said, the CAPTCHA is not seen by administrators, but it has apparently been around for some time, and certainly before the latest upgrade. I think it may be something that CPWebmaster implemented last year, but I could be wrong about that.

Turning the CAPTCHA off altogether may be an option, but otherwise I support HelpJazz' suggestion of making a user group that doesn't encounter it. Or else, if this is possible, only make new users use it, along the lines of the new-user restrictions discussed on this page not long ago (but apparently deleted and destroyed, because I can't find them).

Philip J. Rayment 22:08, 15 October 2008 (EDT)

I can only imagine that a CAPTCHA (thanks, Liam) is necessary to prevent spam links, but like HelpJazz it's like looking at a magic eye picture to me. We disagree on many issues, but I have no intention of posting inappropriate links. Corry 23:47, 15 October 2008 (EDT)
I find the CAPTCHA difficult and frustrating to use; I prefer the simple math problem. Both serve the same purpose - why irritate people if you don't have to. I haven't seen a significant problem with spam links here anyway, so the math problem seems to have been sufficient. --Hsmom 14:20, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
After complaining, I would like to say that I do enjoy some of the minor changes on the site. The CAPTCHA thing is the only negative I've found. HelpJazz 19:22, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
I have to throw in with the ":pro-math" group on this one - I'm in my mid-40's, and even with my reading glasses on I have a problem making out what the CAPTCHA is spelling until the second or third try. When you factor in the edit conflicts that can occur while trying to get it right, this really hinders more than helps. Unless there's been a proven track record of automated link spamming on the site I'd ask that we go back to the match problem, thanks. --DinsdaleP 19:24, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
I don't know if this can be done selectively. Liberal vandals did use bots to exploit the math test to generate spam registrations. Also, note that this change is in the MediaWiki software upgrade, so apparently it does address a real problem.
We welcome suggestions and contributions by all above, but I've noticed that some are more quick to complain about the site than about the liberal vandals whose wrongful conduct forces burdensome changes to the site. It's a bit like complaining about the behavior of a victim of a robbery before complaining about the robber himself. I find that odd, and a reason why vandalism is rampant on the internet: so many people refuse to criticize it and what causes it.--Aschlafly 20:23, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Nobody is complaining about the action of a victim here, we're just expressing preference for a particular CAPTCHA. If it's unavoidable, then it's unavoidable. Corry 20:34, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
Ditto. If this is what it takes to cut down vandalism then it's worth it, and I agree that the real shame is that it's needed in the first place. --DinsdaleP 20:50, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
My comment was a general one. It's striking how some accept liberal vandalism and won't complain about it, or discuss its cause. When they do complain, it's about defensive measures that are only made necessary by the vandalism.
If liberals objected to vandalism on the internet as conservatives do, then other liberals wouldn't do it so often.--Aschlafly 21:21, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

Andy, another option is to allow any user who has a confirmed e-mail address to bypass the CAPTCHA. Would you be happy to implement that? Philip J. Rayment 23:37, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

if the site is often bothered by bots editing articles then the graphic word entry needs to stay. The maths question seems to be straight text and an entry box , which can be scripted. A trusted editor group that doesnt get the verification sounds an ideal solution. Markr 23:49, 16 October 2008 (EDT)

The administration may be able to implement the autoconfirmed group of editors, whereby users who have deemed themselves as trusted editors will be granted more flexibility. This may be dictated by the number of edits and the length of time the user has been registered. Gaining autoconfirmed status may remove the CAPTCHA notices too. The administration may then decide to reduce the protection of most protected articles to the autoconfirmed level. Jallen 23:56, 16 October 2008 (EDT)
This sounds sensible. Philip J. Rayment, good suggestion, but anyone can use a free email address, so I don't think that solves the problem. (I'm in my mid-40's like DinsdaleP, and my eyes aren't what they used to be. Of course, my math skills aren't what they used to be either...) --Hsmom 00:04, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
one trick that might help is to sit back away from the screen and read the word rather than try to get each letter. It seems worse if you get closer to the screen. Bugler has raised the issue of some of the words used , is there a wordlist that it uses ? Markr 19:04, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
Yeah, I have 20/20 vision and I still manage to get the letters wrong about half the time thanks to the fuzziness and deformations. I support a return to the old CAPTCHA or a user whitelist. -Foxtrot 14:07, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

About the boxes round categories, the two boxes do show up on the default view of the site, which is the one new visitors see (at least in my browser). I think this should be fixed if possible because it doesn't give that good an impression to those new to the site.--CPalmer 08:56, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

Agree with CPalmer. We don't want the initial impression to be an unfavorable one, and since this is the behavior on the default skin we should fix it. -Foxtrot 14:07, 18 October 2008 (EDT)
I don't know if the MediaWiki software allows changing the defaults for these.--Aschlafly 20:40, 18 October 2008 (EDT)

Hello everyone. Andy just pointed out this thread to me... I'll try and make the captcha more user friendly while still defeating bot generated registrations (which is its true purpose). Also, the "double category" box is a bug, should be fixed within the hour. Thanks for pointing this stuff out. CPWebmaster 13:52, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Thanks Tim. While you are at it, there is apparently now a CAPTCHA for creating new pages. I would like to reiterate here that I think the best way is not to change the type of CAPTCHA, but to change who has to see it. I asked Philip about this very thing several days before the CAPTCHA changed. HelpJazz 15:54, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
My name is Phil (not to be confused with Philip Rayment), not Tim . ;) The issues with who will be seeing what captcha, and what the captcha will be when it is displayed are being worked out as we speak. CPWebmaster 16:13, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
Oh duh, sorry. I didn't read the username the whole way! HelpJazz 16:39, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Everyone, I think our brilliant Webmaster has fixed the problems described above. You can confirm.--Aschlafly 17:54, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

THANKS for turning off CAPTCHA. It was driving me crazy. RJJensen 18:07, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
Thank you Phil the brilliant Webmaster :) Everything seems to be in working order (though I'm not using the default skin, so there was never anything wrong with cats for me :) )HelpJazz 18:26, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
Thank you very much! Corry 19:06, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Skeptical of study

This study claims that pastors "dismiss" mental illness. I am very skeptical of these results, and I'd like to hear your take. Maybe analysis of it could be a Conservapedia challenge? I'm not actually sure if it deserves that much attention. BHarlan 13:07, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

I'd be skeptical less of the statistical results (which I'm sure are relatively accurate) than the implication that all those pastors were wrong. Certainly some pastors misdiagnose mental illness as a spiritual illness. But how many people have I met who went to psychologists who misdiagnosed their spiritual illness as a mental illness!? Both sides have a stake in their particular area of expertise -- we shouldn't be surprised at a little overdiagnosis in favor of their own relevence and disposable income:). Ungtss 13:53, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
I agree with the first part of your message, but not the second. Some of the data I would like to see is how these people were diagnosed as mentally ill, and if that diagnosis has withstood the test of time. I have no idea how pastors have a monetary stake in trying to help people, though psychiatrists certainly do. BHarlan 13:59, 17 October 2008 (EDT)
I agree with your question about the diagnosis -- I'd just add that I wouldn't be surprised to find that people who are counseled by a pastor would tend to be more loyal, and more generous, congregants. I wouldn't say it's all about money either, though. Pastors also have more expertise in spritual matters, and more faith in spriritual solutions -- just based on their choice of vocation. The same could be said of shrinks. Just my 2 cents:). Ungtss 14:36, 17 October 2008 (EDT)

A question

Hello, Mr. Schlafly, I had some questions about your class size essay which I posted on its talk page. It appears you may have overlooked them so I'll repost them here, if you don't mind:

I'm sorry, I'm a bit confused and hoping you can clarify a few things for me.

  1. You stress the importance of discussion and hearing from students, and I agree. However, on Conservapedia, you disparage discussion, and sometimes ban people for too much of it, even in important topics such as this one.
  2. Do larger classes necessarily mean you hear more discussion from more students? In my own experience in college, we had the most and the best discussions in smaller classes (10-15, or even fewer). I only ever took one really large class (more than 100 students) and it had none of the advantages you describe. It was all lecture from the professor, there was no discussion, no competition (I had no idea what grades other students were getting, and only cared what grade I got), no social development (I didn't know anyone in the class when I started, and knew no one when I left), and the exams were essays graded by a TA. Do you think the advantages that come with class size have an upward limit, above which they start to no longer be applicable? Or would a class of 200 or 2000 still be better than a class of 15?
  3. If large class sizes are always better, then wouldn't that mean a parent staying home and teaching his or her child is a poor method of teaching, as that is a class size of one, the smallest class size possible? (I realize this is by no means the only method of homeschooling, but it is certainly not an uncommon one.)
  4. I still would like to hear your thoughts on teenagers being responsible for mankind's greatest achievements. While undoubtedly teenagers have made great accomplishments on occasion, I can think of none that I would rank among the greatest. Was this a slight exaggeration?

Thank you. BenR 22:06, 19 October 2008 (EDT)

I'll reply over there. In the future, please be more concise. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 23:20, 19 October 2008 (EDT)


Er... If I may inquire, why was I just blocked, all my edits reverted, and then unblocked again? HDCase 10:57, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Your edits looked suspicious, but your account has been quickly restored. How about contributing some encyclopedic-type info next? Thanks and Godspeed.--Aschlafly 11:03, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
Ah, alright. I'll see if I can find something in my areas of expertise not already covered-- But that'll be a challenge in a comprehensive encyclopedia like this! In any case, can I fix those rebroken redirects? HDCase 11:12, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
OK, please do. Thanks.--Aschlafly 11:23, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

Removal of a redirect

Mr. Schafly, could you remove the redirects from the British soccer articles to the article Soccer teams in England? I can't create the pages unless said redirects are removed. Thank you. JY23 20:44, 20 October 2008 (EDT)

I deleted four. See Special:RecentChanges. Is that what you mean? If it is, then I can delete the other redirects. Godspeed.--Aschlafly 20:52, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
I think those were all moved to the soccer article, because there was no need to have a bunch of tiny little articles. But having a redirect shouldn't stop you from editing the page, that's weird. HelpJazz 20:53, 20 October 2008 (EDT)
I've just undeleted the four articles that Andy deleted, and I'm explaining here why.
  • As HelpJazz said, their existence as redirects should not prevent them being edited to be normal articles. It could have been the case, however, that they were turned into redirects and protected, which protection the deletion and restoration has removed. (That happened with older versions of MediaWiki, but whether it happens with pages protected under older versions and restored under the current version I don't know. Also, their history doesn't show them being protected, which I would expect if they had been.) In any case, they are not now protected.
  • Two of them were variations on the same name; JY23 won't be making both of them into articles.
  • It's best if they are kept as redirects until they are made into articles, especially if anything else is pointing to them.
  • Also as HelpJazz said, we prefer to put them in one larger articles instead of several smaller ones. If, however, JY23 is going to write fair-sized articles on them (i.e. more than two or three paragraphs), then that should be okay.
JY23, if your problem is knowing how to get to the redirect page, please ask that and we will help you out.
Philip J. Rayment 05:43, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
As HelpJazz said, the articles on individual teams were consolidated into one to 'tidy up' a large number of small articles on teams (and there are 92 sides in the English professional leagues). I did much of this in the early days of my time here, at the specific request of Ed Poor (where is he?). If the work is to be undone, fair enough - but I'm just pointing this out so that a few months down the line someone else doesn't have the idea of consolidating them again, and then later on... ad infinitum. Bugler 06:20, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
What to include and what not to include is a perennial problem with Wiki encyclopaedias, and one that Wikipedia has grappled with also, without a clear solution, as far as I know. On the one hand Andy doesn't want too much stuff on unimportant social stuff (most music bands, for example), and I quite understand this and agree in principle. In practice, however, it is not so easy to know where to draw the line. There are already articles on various American sporting teams, listing all their current players. To deny the same of British sporting teams is clearly unfair (assuming the British teams in question are as relevant as the American teams that have articles, which may not be a correct assumption for all I know). Consolidating numerous small entries into one larger (but not huge) article is a good idea, but that doesn't answer the question of whether those small entries are sufficient or whether each team (in this case) is justified in having a larger article each. Philip J. Rayment 07:31, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
I defer to what the consensus is here about the sports articles. I was a big sports fan when I was younger, and see both benefits and detriments to this stuff. The benefits are that it can be a "hook" that interests a teenager in a work ethic, competition, sportsmanship, and other characteristics are productive, and then lead someone to learning. The detriments are that it is not terribly educational. If people like to post this information here, I don't mind (although I do mind some of the awful rock band and Hollywood stuff that dominates Wikipedia).--Aschlafly 08:53, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
I think another advantage to keeping them all in one place is that there have been many attempts at subterfuge with respect to the "football" (aka soccer) articles. Keeping them all at one place, instead of spread out into many tiny articles, makes keeping a handle on this a lot easier. HelpJazz 11:46, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
I searched "Arsenal F.C." (my favorite team) to create the article, and it just showed up with the "Soccer teams in England" article. No redirect page showed. I can't create the article without a "Create" page showing up. JY23 18:38, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
When you type in "Arsenal F.C." and end up at "Soccer teams in England", immediately below that wording (the page title) will be the wording "(Redirected from Arsenal F.C.)". If you click on the link in "Arsenal F.C." you will be taken to the redirect page which can then be edited. Philip J. Rayment 21:49, 21 October 2008 (EDT)
Article created. Arsenal F.C. Link to the left. Thanks for your help. JY23 18:34, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
Glad to help. But "one of the winningest"???? How about "one of the most successful"? Philip J. Rayment 22:06, 22 October 2008 (EDT)
Shudder. "Winningest" is a horrible word created by sportscasters. -Foxtrot 21:27, 23 October 2008 (EDT)

Deleting an innacurate page

Where do you suggest we begin a discussion about pages that are, as written, inaccurate and should be either renamed or deleted. In particular, I'm talking about modal tonalities which mixes 2 different concepts that should, I think, best be seperated onto two pages and dealt with independantly. I don't know how you all discuss this, here at Conservapedia, but I'd love to participate in such a discussion. It's a good learning tool to see how professionals (I'd say adults, but that's offensive. Lawyers and such as yourself, programers, others here who are professionals) manage these discussions and arrive at conclusions. Thanks.--JeanJacques 11:58, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Generally the best approach is to go to the talk page of the article in question (which I see you did). If something is out-and-out wrong, it's usually ok to simply change it yourself. If there are multiple interpretations of something, it's best to ask on the talk page first. HelpJazz 16:49, 21 October 2008 (EDT)

Obama Page

Hi Aschlafly, I was wondering if you saw my justification for removing the "Hussein means 'descendant of the Prophet'" from the Barack Obama page. It's on the talk page, and is the 3rd heading on the first page. I'd fix it myself, but it's still locked due to vandalism. Have a good day! --Limbo 11:01, 21 October 2008 (EDT)


Hi, I tried to undo the vandalism at Karjou's talk-page, too, but the spam-filter didn't allow me... --BRichtigen 08:09, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

I got it. Thanks.--Aschlafly 08:14, 22 October 2008 (EDT)

I just noticed that you reverted a supposed vandal edit on Examples of Bias in Wikipedia that never actually happened! How did you manage to get the "reverted edit by [user]" summary on that page? I'm just curious. --Alpnineone 21:18, 24 October 2008 (EDT)

When a vandal is identified, it's common simply to revert all his edits. That seems to be what happened in your example. Perhaps his edit to that entry was a nullity.--Aschlafly 21:21, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
Thanks. Actually, the user in question never actually edited the page, as evidenced in the page history. How could you revert an edit that never really happened?--Alpnineone 21:33, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
Don't know. Perhaps someone who has spent more time with MediaWiki software can tell us.--Aschlafly 21:36, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
Someone may have hidden the revision with the oversight permission. It hides the revision from the history list and the diff links. Andy, Philip J. Rayment and the CPWebmaster have this permission to hide revisions which contain vandalism, breach security of user's personal details and/or for legal reasons. This may have been a test use of the feature by Philip or the webmaster. They were probably hiding the vulgar edit summary. Jallen 21:42, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
OK, thanks everybody! -Alpnineone 14:01, 25 October 2008 (EDT)
Basically correct. Oversight was used to hide a particularly vulgar edit, so that it and the edit summary no longer shows in the history. The same was done with some other edits by the same editor and one other. Philip J. Rayment 06:11, 25 October 2008 (EDT)


Mr. Schlafly, you're all done grading American History Homework Six now, right? I wasn't sure if it would be worth doing it now; perhaps I should just start on HW 7. Had a wonderful trip by the way. I was sorry to miss "Black Week" in class, lol. --Ṣ₮ёVeN 20:10, 24 October 2008 (EDT)

Steven, no, I'm not done grading homework six. There's still time for you to finish and post your answers and you should do so.--Aschlafly 20:29, 24 October 2008 (EDT)
Alright, I'm finished now. I've begun H7. Thank you for being a patient teacher. --Ṣ₮ёVeN 11:57, 30 October 2008 (EDT)