Difference between revisions of "Talk:Atheistic Style"
From Conservapedia
(→Smarter: reply) |
|||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
On another note: This article is among a series that make Conservapedia a laughing stock, if we really want to be taken seriously, we should refrain from this. In what other Encyclopedia would you find something like this? [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 19:37, 3 March 2008 (EST) | On another note: This article is among a series that make Conservapedia a laughing stock, if we really want to be taken seriously, we should refrain from this. In what other Encyclopedia would you find something like this? [[User:DLerner|DLerner]] 19:37, 3 March 2008 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | : DLerner, if you fear mockery, then you won't make much progress finding and spreading the truth. A little more concern about the truth and less concern about who among the less informed are laughing would be beneficial to you.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:51, 3 March 2008 (EST) | ||
Revision as of 00:51, March 4, 2008
Isn't this a bit childish? JosiahB 11:14, 30 November 2007 (EST)
In what ways? --~BCSTalk2ME 11:16, 30 November 2007 (EST)
- It's just a personal essay, based on solely personal opinion, and not really wholly true at that. I've proposed for deletion. TheEvilSpartan 23:25, 3 January 2008 (EST)
Josiah and "TheEvilSpartan", let's improve the entry. Think positively, not negatively.--Aschlafly 18:11, 3 March 2008 (EST)
- If you wish to nominate the page for deletion you need to insert the delete template at the top of the page. See here for template information. However, I should warn you that as this article was written by Andy Schlafly it does not need to contain any citations. That is one of the unwritten rules of Conservapedia. Further, the delete notice will likely be removed by one of the sysop/acolytes, probably Crocoite (see, for example, here). And it is quite likely that you will be blocked (see, for example here). --VincentMC 18:14, 3 March 2008 (EST)
- That's false about me. This is a work-in-progress and much of it is indisputable. The demands that it be deleted are obviously ideological, and we do not allow liberal censorship here. That should be obvious. Thanks and Godspeed.--Aschlafly 18:30, 3 March 2008 (EST)
- Really? Let's see shall we? --VincentMC 18:34, 3 March 2008 (EST)
Smarter
I'd like to think that we are smarter then 100 years ago, but I'm bot an atheist.
On another note: This article is among a series that make Conservapedia a laughing stock, if we really want to be taken seriously, we should refrain from this. In what other Encyclopedia would you find something like this? DLerner 19:37, 3 March 2008 (EST)
- DLerner, if you fear mockery, then you won't make much progress finding and spreading the truth. A little more concern about the truth and less concern about who among the less informed are laughing would be beneficial to you.--Aschlafly 19:51, 3 March 2008 (EST)
