Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (conservation)
 
(402 intermediate revisions by 16 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
[[Image:Conservlogo.png|right|thumb|250px|Conservative? It can't be - it only has PART of our glorious flag on it!]]
+
[[File:Conservapedia logo.png|thumbnail|right|300px|Conservapedia logo]]
−
{{Q|There is only one thing in life worse than being maligned on Conservapedia, and that is not being maligned on Conservapedia.|Oscar Wilde}}
+
{| align=right border=3 cellspacing=0 style="border-width: 5px; border-color: #c0c0c0; background: #e0e0e0; margin: 2em;"
 +
| style="text-align: center; padding: 10px 40px 10px 40px;" | [[Previous_Breaking_News/Conservapedia| Previous Breaking News:<br>Conservapedia]]
 +
|}
 +
'''Conservapedia''', launched on November 21, 2006, is a [[conservative]], [[family-friendly]] [[Wiki]] [[encyclopedia]].  It was founded by [[teacher]] and [[attorney]] [[Andrew Schlafly]] with the help of several students from his fall 2006 World History class. In May 2008, Schlafly and some of his [[homeschooling|homeschooled]] students appeared on the [[CBC]] news program The Hour (see: [[Videos on Conservapedia]]).
  
−
{{Q|I personally believe that U.S. Americans are unable to do so because, uhmmm, some people out there in our nation don't have maps and uh, I believe that our, I, education like such as uh, South Africa, and uh, the Iraq, everywhere like such as, and I believe that they should, uhhh, our education over here in the US should help the US, uh, should help South Africa, it should help the Iraq and the Asian countries so we will be able to build up our future, for our children.|Ms. South Carolina}}
+
When a student handed in her paper using the date-markers “[[BCE]]” and "CE” from [[Wikipedia]], Schlafly realized that Wikipedia, despite its claim of neutrality, contained bias against the achievements of [[Christianity]] and conservatism.  Other occasions of [[liberal bias]], including the reversion of factual edits about the 2005 Kansas Evolution Hearings, led to the creation and launch of Conservapedia.
  
−
'''Conservapedia'''<ref>Or '''Liberalpedia''', as it might as well be called</ref> is the wiki-based online encyclopedia project that purports itself to be "the trustworthy encyclopedia." Little do its poor, misguided editors realize, however, that Conservapedia is actually rife with '''stinking ''liberal'' bias and viewpoints.''' While its creator, Andrew Schlafly <ref>Using the internet name Arsefly</ref>, wears an elaborate façade of the archetypical conservative: overt piety, disapproval of so-called "science," and hatred for all things liberal, the ''liberal'' stance of his sad website is manifestly clear. He single-handedly shames the United States flag by printing "conservapedia" right onto it.
+
Though Conservapedia originally contained mostly [[history]] articles, it has grown over several 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]].
  
−
==History==
+
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 has now had [[Special:Statistics|more than 900 million page views]], and enjoys prominence on search engines.
−
[[Image:Conservapedia.PNG|thumb|150px|Conservapedia in its true, ''liberal'' form.]]
 
−
Conservapedia was created as a seemingly trustworthy encyclopedia by Andrew Schlafly, extolling the values our great nation was built upon, the values of [[Real America]]; independence, personal responsibility, self-interest<ref>...and obedience to authority</ref> as well as [[Freedom of Expression|freedom of the press]]<ref>Go Fox News!</ref> and [[Creationism|freedom of religion]].<ref>You know which one</ref> It began in 2006, supposedly with the grand vision of expunging the rampant liberal bias from but one small site on the internet. Perhaps the vision was too grand, but it is far more likely that Schlafly himself is to blame. It is not that he is not conservative, just that he has never had the nerve to do [[genocide|what was necessary]] to keep the liberal scoundrels, who clearly penetrate all aspects of the internet, in line.
 
  
−
At first, only [[Southern Baptists|US citizens]] with [[fascism|conservative viewpoints]] were able to find the site and register for accounts. This is because conservatives are naturally smarter and more physically attractive than everyone else, although it is still not 100% clear which page in the [[Bible]] indicates how the latter normal feature of all conservatives factored into their ability to find the site. For this brief time things were pious, clean, and morally sound &ndash; there was even room for some of that good old-fashioned [[Slavery|southern hospitality]] and [[racism|charm]]. However, this utopia could not last.
+
During the 2016 U.S presidential election year, Conservapedia saw a major surge in web traffic. Post [[Donald Trump]]'s election, Conservapedia continues to see a significant growth of web traffic.
  
−
Soon, some conservatives who may have been slightly more socially liberal and who agreed with some American democrats on one or two issues began to discover the site. In other words, everything was ruined. They thought they could make Conservapedia more "fair," and soon the rivers of "fact"<ref>Ronald Reagan once said "Facts are stupid things." ''Ronald Reagan'' said it. It's true. It's not a fact, though. They're stupid.</ref> &ndash; nothing more than filth, and yes, even '''''[[truth|liberal deceit]]''''' &ndash; began to flow freely.
+
==Leadership==
−
[[Image:Andrew Schlafly.jpg|right|thumb| Conservapedia's founder, Andrew Schlafly. Smiling on the outside, ''liberal'' on the inside.]]
+
Unlike Wikipedia, which bills itself as a [[democratic]] system and ends up functioning as a [[mobocracy]], Conservapedia employs a hierarchy based on a [[Meritocracy|merit system]].
  
−
Andrew Schlafly tried to slow this inevitability. Banning anonymous editing was a step in the correct direction, as it is clear that all anonymous IPs have a strong liberal bias. However, when banning ''liberal'' vandals, many of which had made as much as '''one''' mistake, administrators often distributed bans only lasting for ''five measly years''. In Texas, mistakes warrant the death penalty! True conservatives are "tough on crime," and Mr. Schlafly was clearly not tough on crime.
+
Andrew Schlafly is the chief administrator and is the most prolific editor, followed by bureaucrats, administrators, and regular editors. Editors who contribute substantial content may be promoted to administrator and bureaucrat, or gain extra user rights such as blocking power and uploading images.
  
−
Before long, Conservapedia contained articles about such falsities as "Evolution," which isn't real, "[[Homosexuality]]," which isn't real, either, and "Bacon," which, despite being real, is far more delicious than it is portrayed by the liberal dogs that wrote the article about it.
+
==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.
  
−
In recent times, Conservapedia has degenerated into little more than a melting pot of heathens and [[Sodomy|sodomites]]. If this corruption by liberals continues, it is assured that soon even the [[Bible]] will no longer be considered a pure source of factual information.
+
==Differences with Wikipedia==
  
−
[[Image:Gunsandgod.jpg‎|left|thumb|The problem isn't that Conservapedia isn't pro-gun and pro-Jesus. The problem is that Conservapedia isn't pro-gun and pro-Jesus ''enough''.]]
+
''See also:'' [[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia|How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]] and [[Essay: Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki|Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki]] and [https://conservapedia.com/Category:Conservapedia_Debates Conservapedia debates pages]
−
==Wiki: the Communist Manifesto==
 
−
The format called the "wiki", being based on collaborative contributions by many contributors, is the opposite of good, clean, American Conservative values. It is, simply, collectivization in disguise.
 
  
−
Real Conservative internet sites, like Worldnetdaily, use laissez-faire competition, ''not'' collaboration, for their pages. Conservapedia is a wiki, and wikis depend on the input of the common worker for their content. Therefore, Conservapedia, and its Conservapedian proletariat supporters, is a Commie-pinko front for liberal values.
+
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>Robert Siegel. [http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8286084 Conservapedia: Data for Birds of a Political Feather?], npr.org, November 29, 2009.</ref>
  
−
''Comrade'' Schlafly says that Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public, but statistics show that members of Conservapedia are, on average, more than ''eleven times more liberal'' than ''real'' Americans!<ref>No references needed here, it's painfully obvious!</ref>
+
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.
  
−
Worse, Politburo Chief Schlafly wants to take the internet in a worldwide revolution of so-called "Conservative values". Luckily, real Conservatives see through his paper thin disguise, and point out that under his no-clothes this self styled Emperor is a dirty, naked liberal.
+
The administrative hierarchy prevents Conservapedia from being hijacked by a faction, and thus preserves it from mobocracy, as discussed above.
  
−
Some critics have pointed out that the dictionary definitions for communism and liberalism are two quite different things. Real conservative critics, in turn, reply that neither communism nor liberalism are conservatism. Therefore, they're both the same thing; enemies of conservatives. Besides, real Conservatives don't own dictionaries. They don't need them.<ref>Definitions are for University professors and blue states.</ref>
+
Conservapedia has come up with a key [[wiki]] metric that measures tolerance/intolerance at a wiki. Namely, the [[Essay: Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki|edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki]] which measures the close-mindedness/intolerance and [[groupthink]] of a wiki. Mathematically, the edits to blocked editor accounts ratio can be expressed as: Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki = E % BE, where E is the number of edits to the wiki and BE equals the number of blocked editor accounts of the wiki. The edits to blocked editor accounts ratio was partly inspired by [[Andrew Schlafly]]'s essay [[Essay:Quantifying Openmindedness|Quantifying Openmindedness]]. Unlike Conservapedia, Wikipedia does not have a policy where members of the public are free to set up debate pages and engage in vigorous debate where the debate pages are lightly moderated (see: [https://conservapedia.com/Category:Conservapedia_Debates Conservapedia debates pages]).
  
−
==Christian values???==
+
==Influential editors and users==
−
<span class=plainlinks>Another example of the rampant liberalism in Conservapedia is its unwillingness to ban people for the amount of time that God would have wanted. As it states in Holy Scripture,
+
*[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] is the username of the aforementioned founder of Conservapedia, [[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]]. He has contributed massively to Conservapedia since the beginning, authored many articles including the [[World History Lectures|student lectures]], and is the final authority on article content and user conduct.
−
[[Image:603px-Sputnikteck.jpg|right|thumb|Andrew Schlafly, shown connecting the Conservapedia server to the internet. Just out of frame, Phyllis Schlafly (his mother and a "conservative" activist) is burning an American flag.]]
 
−
{{cquote|And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast [it] from thee: it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having none.|4=Matt 18:9}}
 
−
Or, the more direct quote:
 
−
{{cquote|God beholdeth at all things and knoweth all sinnes. God sayeth in his wrath, "I hath seen thine liberal[istic] editing on Conservapedia and I will wish thee a fine time in hell, for thou knowst that is where thou belongst.  Thine editings are a disgrace and blasphemise mine teachinges and thou knowest that thou art a sinner. "|4=Joseph 4:20}}
 
−
In other words, it's better to be saved than sorry. God's ban is a permaban. The Bible doesn't lie.<ref>It's inerrant. Obviously.</ref> Unfortunately, Conservapedia refuses to ban Jews, Muslims, Hindus, and Buddhists for any length of time even close to what God would have wanted. One Jewish user was blocked for [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=Conservative&page=User%3AJewishguy 5 years]. Five puny years! That's not even ''close'' to the eternity of hellfire that all sinners (and Liberals''!'') in the wrong religions will endure! And that was after a warning. Does God give warnings? ''Hell no'', he smites. Not only that, but the Jewish user, was subsequently [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewishguy unblocked]! Obviously, ''Rabbi'' Schlafly was in on this, and is perpetuating a degradation of true Christian values.</span>
 
  
−
<span class=plainlinks>Similarly way-too-short blocks were issued to users like [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Hindu this Hindu], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:LefthandedJew this Jew], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3AIpblocklist&action=search&limit=&ip=Voodoonomics this Voodoo], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewsdidwtc this Jew], and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Jewsus this Jew]. Clearly, ''Imam-High Priest-Brahmin-Witch doctor-Guru-Rastafarian-Rabbi-Thing'' Schlafly lacks any sort of true Christian morality.</span>
+
*[[User:RobSmith|RobSmith]] is the primary curator of Conservapedia's ''Breaking News''. He created some of Conservapedia's most acclaimed and trafficked articles. He has documented how the [[Russia hoax]], [[2020 election fraud]] and the [[NATO proxy war against Russia]] is all one story that "should never have happened". He authored the [[Coronavirus]] article, and is a tireless author on [[Socialism]], [[Communism]], [[Fascism]], [[Maoism]], [[Political correctness]], the [[Peoples Republic of China]], [[Cultural Marxism]], the [[New Deal]], [[Great Society]], [[Volodymyr Zelensky]], [[Vladimir Putin]], [[American Foreign Policy]], the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections and every President from [[Franklin Roosevelt]] to [[Barack Obama]]. RobSmith is the Founder of Wikipedia Project Cold War History.<ref>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cold_War/Members Wikipedia Project Cold War History], December 6, 2006. wikipedia.org</ref> ''[[The Gatewaypundit]]'' cited the work involved in creating Rob's extensive [[List of Americans in the Venona papers|Venona project]]<ref>https://rumble.com/v6vky6n-molyneux-mccarthyism-5-the-venona-cables.html</ref> series as "Conservapedia is the only place collecting a great deal of factual historical material in any coherent way."<ref>[https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/09/tgp-interview-andrew-schlafly-conservapedia-founder/ TGP Interview with Andrew Schlafly, Conservapedia Founder], By Benjamin Wetmore, Sep. 5, 2023. www.thegatewaypundit.com</ref>
  
−
==Homosexuality at Conservapedia==
+
*The [[User:Conservative]] account has contributed the majority of content to the popular [[atheism]], [[evolution]], [[homosexuality]] related articles. User:Conservative's work has been cited/quoted/referred to by the ''[[Los Angeles Times]]'', ''[[USA Today]]'', ''The [[Chicago Tribune]]'', ''[[The Telegraph]]'', [[BBC]], ''The Tampa Tribune'', [[Concerned Women for America]], [[CRU]], [[WorldNetDaily]], [[Alister McGrath]], [[Shockofgod]], [[Penn Jillette]], [[PZ Myers]], [[Secular Talk|Kyle Kulinski]] and [[Lewis Black]].<ref>{{Cite episode|title=Episode 12087|url=http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=89307&title=new-media|series=The Daily Show|network=Comedy Central|air-date=June 27, 2007|access-date=May 27, 2008|archive-date=April 6, 2008|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080406012918/http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=89307&title=new-media|url-status=live}} Black highlighted Conservapedia's [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexuality&oldid=188063 introductory sentence] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923210447/http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Homosexuality&oldid=188063 |date=September 23, 2015 }} "homosexuality is an immoral sexual lifestyle." In response, he said: "On Conservapedia, '[[gay]]' sounds way more interesting!"</ref> The [[PNN News and Ministry Network]] produced a video entitled ''Viral article deals major blow to atheism''. The book ''Atheist Persona: Causes and Consequences'' by John J. Pasquini, Th.D, cites Conservapedia's [[Causes of atheism]] article several times.<ref>[https://books.google.com/books/about/Atheist_Persona.html?id=TaTsnQEACAAJ ''Atheist Persona: Causes and Consequences'' by John J. Pasquini, Th.D.]</ref><ref>[https://sites.google.com/view/conservapedia-atheism/home Conservapedia influence on public perception of atheism]</ref>
−
Since the creation of the site by Andrew Schlafly, son of [[ball-buster|feminist]] Phyllis Schlafly and brother of homosexual John Schlafly, there's been a noticeable focus on homosexual desires in many of the articles. Overall, this disturbing trend leads to the conclusion that homosexuality is always on the [[Oral_sex|tip of the tongue]] of various Conservapedians. Indeed, this trend has seemingly intensified over the past year, with some users finding themselves [[Orgy|ganged up on]] in regards to homosexuality. Obviously, due to the nature of the site (the site is aimed towards homeschooled children), parents have expressed concern over numerous articles and discussions, including [[Bukkake|"Homosexual Overcoming"]] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality_and_smoking "Smoking Homosexuals"]. One of the clear proponents of the Homosexual focus of Conservapedia is user Ed Poor, who displays with pride that he is a [http://www.conservapedia.com/File:Ed_poor_grinning.jpg member of the Homosexual "Bear" community], woof!
 
  
−
==Promises of Conservapedia in Christian Scripture==
+
*[[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.
−
===In Revelation, the book wherein basically everything is promised if you try hard enough===
 
−
{{cquote|...I saw a woman seated on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names, with seven heads and ten horns|4=Rv 17:3}}
 
−
This states that God promises that one day, a great beast shall rise up from whence he was banished, and he would be great. This beast, clearly, is the beast of '''liberal pussy communist bastards'''.  Further symbolizing them is the fact that a ''woman'' is seated on it.  A '''''WOMAN!!!'''''  Who is, by the way, not in the kitchen.  What does this tell us?  That avarice and inhumanity will rise. Later in this chapter, we get a promise of a savior:
 
−
{{cquote|...but the Lamb will conquer them, for he is Lord of lords and king of kings...|4=Rv 17:14}}
 
  
−
This is Conservapedia! It will crush the disgusting insurrection of the moralless beast, restore the gross misogyny and tyranny that God would want. It is killing beasts and harlots since before Angels and Airwaves were born. Alas, something has gone wrong...
+
*[[User:TerryH | TerryH]], a fabulous writer and biblical scholar who graduated from [[Yale]], has broken big stories here in addition to translating some of the [[Bible]].
−
[[Image:Bible2.jpg|thumb|left|Artist's conception of Conservapedia 1.0, which WILL beat Wikipedia 1.0 to the shelves!  Liberal pussy communist bastards...]]
 
  
−
===In Genesis, which is kinda the opposite of Revelation, but hey!===
+
*Karajou was one of the original three who joined at the beginning of the influx in February 2007, amid massive media attention, and has been an extraordinary contributor ever since.  The cartoons and many of the military history entries are his superb work.
−
{{cquote|For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.|4=Gn 3:5-6}}
+
 
−
This seems, at first, to be Conservapedia.  What else could the fruit that teaches all that is true be?  But wait!  God is pissed off now!
+
*[[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] has a PhD in American Studies and has been a professor of history and political science at numerous schools. Professor Jensen has made significant contibutions to Conservapedia's historical articles.
−
{{cquote|And he said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree, of which I commanded that you should not eat?|4=Gn 3:14}}
+
 
−
And now it's clear.  These false truths are what God dislikes, these blasphemous lies perpetuated by liberal "scientists," who weren't even homeschooled and are therefore retarded, and then spread by evil websites '''just like Conservapedia.''' We all know who ''else'' presents these false truths; the serpent.  The serpent...or those '''liberal, pussy, pink, socialist, feminist, lesbian, softy, anti-fascist communist bastards.''' And here God promises Conservapedia:
+
*[[User:Iduan|Iduan]] has thousands of edits and his work on Templates has been particularly noteworthy.
−
{{cquote|I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; it shall strike at your head as you strike at his heel.|4=Gn 3:15}}
+
 
−
What better representation of Conservapedia than a concept such as enmity?  We will STRIKE at the liberal pussy communist bastards as they attempt to bruise our heels, and we shall slaughter all of them, just as God undoubtedly intended.<ref>Messages of peace and love in the Bible are metaphorical or anecdotal, what God really wants is genocide of all liberals.</ref>
+
*[[User:1990'sguy|1990'sguy]] has created much important content, including the highly-viewed [[Donald Trump achievements]] article series, the [[European migrant crisis]], content on nationalism and globalism, and European conservative-populist parties and leaders.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:DavidB4|DavidB4]] has expanded countless articles on computers and technology, and he runs two important bots on Conservapedia.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:Jpatt | Jpatt]] has more than 13,000 edits and 2,000 blocks, and is phenomenal in identifying good stories and posting headlines for them.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:LT]] wrote many articles on the [[Old Right]] and history of [[conservativism]] leading up to the [["Party switch" myth]].
 +
 
 +
*[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]], active at Conservapedia for many years, and at Wikipedia for more than seven years, was the first elected bureaucrat at Wikipedia and has been extremely influential at both sites.  At Conservapedia, he has primarily aimed at accuracy, rationality, and user cooperation.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:Chippeterson]] has been a brilliant editor of numerous political entries.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:TK|TK]] made many substantive contributions and was known for his vigilance against vandals (RIP).
 +
 
 +
*[[User:DeanS|DeanS]] helped found the Conservapedia news project, and he is its main contributor. He has also worked on articles related to [[Mormonism]].
 +
 
 +
*[[User:SharonS|SharonS]] has been an editor since the very beginning of Conservapedia, and was interviewed and quoted in a newspaper article to explain and defend the project.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] works on maintenance, and in addition to neutral contributions has created the popular article [[Essay:Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"|Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"]], as well as the Conservapedia article itself.
 +
 
 +
*[[User:JacobB|JacobB]] is a gifted mathematician who has been invaluable to many of those entries.
 +
 
 +
==Impact==
 +
Conservapedia has been praised and ridiculed in the [[media]], on [[blog]]s, and on rival sites.  Critics claim that it contains fringe viewpoints, while supporters note that it simply provides another viewpoint and an alternative to liberal bias. 
 +
 
 +
*Conservapedia provides information about the [[American]] people that liberal critics would rather hide: for example, nearly 50 percent of Americans reject evolution and embrace [[creationism]], and even more want creationism taught alongside evolution in school. <ref>Bootie Cosgrove-Mather. [http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/11/22/opinion/polls/main657083.shtml Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution], ''CBS News'', November 22, 2004.</ref>  Another example is the fact that atheists- often claiming to be more equipped to help their fellow men than religious people- actually give less to charity than believers, even when church giving is excluded.
 +
 
 +
*Search results for controversial subjects such as [[atheism]] and [[evolution]] contain Conservapedia links within a few searches and often on the first page.<ref>[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS293US293&q=atheism&btnG=Search atheism - Google Search]</ref><ref>[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS293US293&q=theory+of+evolution&btnG=Search theory of evolution - Google Search]</ref> 
 +
 
 +
*Many biographical articles contain religious references and information about the person’s religion, much more so than Wikipedia.  Editor and college student Tasha Jones, ([[User:Taj|Taj]]) said of this aspect, “It gives me a better understanding of how people feel religion relates to our lives.” <ref>Stephanie Simon. [http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jun/19/nation/na-schlafly19 A conservative's answer to Wikipedia], ''Los Angeles Times'', June 19, 2007.</ref>
 +
 
 +
*Conservapedia is active in political advocacy. For example, it [[charter]]ed a bus for the 2009, 2010, and 2011 [[March for Life]].
 +
 
 +
=== Conservapedia on atheism ===
 +
 
 +
''See also:'' [[Conservapedia:Atheism articles statistics]] and [[Conservapedia:Atheism Project|Conservapedia Atheism Project]]
 +
 
 +
The Conservapedia [[atheism]] article has been well-received by [[theism|theists]], major Christian YouTube channels and has received other favorable reviews (see: [[Essay: Conservapedia's atheism article|Public commentary on Conservapedia's atheism article]]). The [[Freedom From Atheism Foundation]] has featured Conservapedia atheism content on their Facebook page which receives a considerable amount of social media traffic.
 +
 
 +
Conservapedia has one the largest collection of articles on atheism on the internet. Its main atheism article and its collection of atheism articles (mainly created using the User: Conservative account) have both received a considerable amount of web traffic. See: [[Conservapedia:Atheism articles statistics]]
 +
 
 +
Conservapedia has over [https://conservapedia.com/Category:Atheism 1,900+ atheism related articles, essays and humor/satire pieces].
 +
 
 +
From 2006-2016, negative views about atheism in the United States have sharpened (see: [[Essay:Views on atheists]]).<ref>[http://cla.umn.edu/news-events/news/atheists-remain-most-disliked-religious-minority-us Atheists Remain Most Disliked Religious Minority in the US]</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Promoting Original Scholarship ==
 +
Many pages tagged as essays are really more like projects, or are otherwise thought-provoking, giving Conservapedia some characteristics of a [[think tank]]. See [[Essay:Best New Conservative Words|Best New Conservative Words]], [[Essay:The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America|The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America]], [[Essay:Top Causes of Rejecting Conservativism|Top Causes of Rejecting Conservativism]], [[Mystery:Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?|Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?]], [[Disputed Biblical Translations]], and [[Linguistic Analysis of Candidates]].
 +
 
 +
== Conservapedia debate pages ==
 +
 
 +
Conservapedians are encouraged to engage in civil debates where both sides support their arguments using evidence and sound arguments.
 +
 
 +
Please see: [[Conservapedia:Debate Topics]]
  
−
==Drawing the obligatory conclusions==
 
−
<div class="noprint" style="clear: right; border: solid #aaa 1px; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; font-size: 90%; background: #f9f9f9; width: 250px; padding: 4px; spacing: 0px; text-align: left; float: right;">
 
−
<div style="float: left;"> [[Image:Conservlogo.png|60px]]</div>
 
−
<div style="margin-left: 60px;">For those who want their "facts" presented to them with rampant liberal bias, the pinko cowards at [[Conservapedia]] have an article about <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia Themselves]</span></div>
 
−
</div>
 
−
{{wikipediapar|Conservapedia|{{PAGENAME}}}}
 
−
And so, all in all, it is painfully clear from the above-cited evidence that the website Conservapedia is an abhorrent, liberal scourge of the [[internet]]. The very fact that its misnomer of a name falsely claims conservative beliefs is itself evidence of the website's glaring liberal deceptions. Perhaps Mr. Schlafly had a better vision in mind when he spawned Conservapedia, but he should know that pride is one of the seven deadly sins, just as [[sloth]], [[anger|wrath]], [[evolution]], and [[premarital wanking|premarital masturrbation]] are.<ref>Little-known honorable mentions for the seven deadly sins included homosexuality, liberalism, questioning any established institutions, and the female orgasm.</ref> Mr. Schlafly's ''pride'' deceived him into thinking that the internet has any hope of supporting clean, family, ''Christian'' values, and because of that he is an ignorant stupid liberal pinko commie left-wing tax-raising media-supporting ignorant stupid liberal. And he is going to Hell. A website as conservative as this surely has the authority to make that judgment.
 
−
noodled revival from russia YOU AMERICAN BITHC!
 
 
==See also==
 
==See also==
−
*[[Examples of Bias in Conservapedia]]
+
*[[Conservapedia:Videos on how to edit a wiki]]
−
*[[Biblical Literalism]]
+
*[[Conservapedia:Commandments|Conservapedia Commandments]]
 +
*[[Conservapedia:About|About Conservapedia]]
 +
*[[Conservapedia:Articles mentioning Conservapedia]]
 +
*[[Videos on Conservapedia]]
 +
*[[Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia]]
 +
*[[Special:ListUsers/Siteadmin|List of Site Admins]]
 +
*[[Conservative Links]]
  
−
== External Links ==
+
== External links ==
−
*[http://www.conservapedia.com Conservapedia Main Page]
 
  
 +
Video on Conservapedia:
  
−
==Footnotes==
+
*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lg48ZmNLpJ0&feature=channel_page Conservapedia on The Hour]
−
<div class="references-small">
 
−
<references/>
 
−
</div>
 
  
−
{{FA|date=14 March 2008|revision=2861793}}
+
{{Conservapedia}}
−
{{UnMedia}}
 
  
−
[[Category:Politics and Government]]
+
[[Category:Conservapedia]][[Category:Wikis]][[Category:Encyclopedias]][[Category:Reference Material]][[Category:Conservative]][[Category:Websites]]
−
[[Category:Conservapedia]][[Category:God]]
 
−
[[Category:Ineffective Right Wing Propaganda]]
 
−
[[Category:War on Science]]
 
−
[[Category:Websites]]
 
−
[[Category:Wiki]]
 
−
[[Category:Followers God Would Rather Not Have]]
 
−
[[Category:People who could benefit from getting laid more often]]
 
−
[[Category:Things George Bush most certainly cares about]]
 
−
[[Category:Nasty Right Wing Bastards]]
 
−
[[Category:Conservapedia]]
 
  
−
[[fi:Conservapedia]]
+
==References==
−
[[pt:Conservapedia]]
+
<references/>
−
[[it:Conservapedia]]
 

Latest revision as of 02:21, July 25, 2026

Conservapedia logo
Previous Breaking News:
Conservapedia

Conservapedia, launched on November 21, 2006, is a conservative, family-friendly Wiki encyclopedia. It was founded by teacher and attorney Andrew Schlafly with the help of several students from his fall 2006 World History class. In May 2008, Schlafly and some of his homeschooled students appeared on the CBC news program The Hour (see: Videos on Conservapedia).

When a student handed in her paper using the date-markers “BCE” and "CE” from Wikipedia, Schlafly realized that Wikipedia, despite its claim of neutrality, contained bias against the achievements of Christianity and conservatism. Other occasions of liberal bias, including the reversion of factual edits about the 2005 Kansas Evolution Hearings, led to the creation and launch of Conservapedia.

Though Conservapedia originally contained mostly history articles, it has grown over several years to be a general reference, with information about history, math, science, politics, religion and other topics. It also contains debates, essays and educational resources.

In March 2007 it was picked up by the media, and faced a barrage of vandalism (See Examples of Moronic Vandalism by the "tolerant"). Ever since then, it has continued to grow, and has now had more than 900 million page views, and enjoys prominence on search engines.

During the 2016 U.S presidential election year, Conservapedia saw a major surge in web traffic. Post Donald Trump's election, Conservapedia continues to see a significant growth of web traffic.

Leadership

Unlike Wikipedia, which bills itself as a democratic system and ends up functioning as a mobocracy, Conservapedia employs a hierarchy based on a merit system.

Andrew Schlafly is the chief administrator and is the most prolific editor, followed by bureaucrats, administrators, and regular editors. Editors who contribute substantial content may be promoted to administrator and bureaucrat, or gain extra user rights such as blocking power and uploading images.

Educational atmosphere

Due to the existence of essays and debates on Conservapedia, and conventions such as the "90/10 rule" and the use of real names, Conservapedia successfully fosters an educational 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.

Differences with Wikipedia

See also: How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia and Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki and Conservapedia debates pages

Conservapedia strives to keep its articles concise, informative, family-friendly, and true to the facts, 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." [1]

Wikipedia articles may contain trivia, gossip, profanity, and even pornographic/sexually explicit images. The latter three are prohibited on Conservapedia and trivia is largely discouraged.

The administrative hierarchy prevents Conservapedia from being hijacked by a faction, and thus preserves it from mobocracy, as discussed above.

Conservapedia has come up with a key wiki metric that measures tolerance/intolerance at a wiki. Namely, the edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki which measures the close-mindedness/intolerance and groupthink of a wiki. Mathematically, the edits to blocked editor accounts ratio can be expressed as: Edits to blocked editor accounts ratio at a wiki = E % BE, where E is the number of edits to the wiki and BE equals the number of blocked editor accounts of the wiki. The edits to blocked editor accounts ratio was partly inspired by Andrew Schlafly's essay Quantifying Openmindedness. Unlike Conservapedia, Wikipedia does not have a policy where members of the public are free to set up debate pages and engage in vigorous debate where the debate pages are lightly moderated (see: Conservapedia debates pages).

Influential editors and users

  • Aschlafly is the username of the aforementioned founder of Conservapedia, Andy Schlafly. He has contributed massively to Conservapedia since the beginning, authored many articles including the student lectures, and is the final authority on article content and user conduct.
  • TerryH, a fabulous writer and biblical scholar who graduated from Yale, has broken big stories here in addition to translating some of the Bible.
  • Karajou was one of the original three who joined at the beginning of the influx in February 2007, amid massive media attention, and has been an extraordinary contributor ever since. The cartoons and many of the military history entries are his superb work.
  • RJJensen has a PhD in American Studies and has been a professor of history and political science at numerous schools. Professor Jensen has made significant contibutions to Conservapedia's historical articles.
  • Iduan has thousands of edits and his work on Templates has been particularly noteworthy.
  • DavidB4 has expanded countless articles on computers and technology, and he runs two important bots on Conservapedia.
  • Jpatt has more than 13,000 edits and 2,000 blocks, and is phenomenal in identifying good stories and posting headlines for them.
  • Ed Poor, active at Conservapedia for many years, and at Wikipedia for more than seven years, was the first elected bureaucrat at Wikipedia and has been extremely influential at both sites. At Conservapedia, he has primarily aimed at accuracy, rationality, and user cooperation.
  • TK made many substantive contributions and was known for his vigilance against vandals (RIP).
  • DeanS helped found the Conservapedia news project, and he is its main contributor. He has also worked on articles related to Mormonism.
  • SharonS has been an editor since the very beginning of Conservapedia, and was interviewed and quoted in a newspaper article to explain and defend the project.
  • JacobB is a gifted mathematician who has been invaluable to many of those entries.

Impact

Conservapedia has been praised and ridiculed in the media, on blogs, and on rival sites. Critics claim that it contains fringe viewpoints, while supporters note that it simply provides another viewpoint and an alternative to liberal bias.

  • Conservapedia provides information about the American people that liberal critics would rather hide: for example, nearly 50 percent of Americans reject evolution and embrace creationism, and even more want creationism taught alongside evolution in school. [8] Another example is the fact that atheists- often claiming to be more equipped to help their fellow men than religious people- actually give less to charity than believers, even when church giving is excluded.
  • Search results for controversial subjects such as atheism and evolution contain Conservapedia links within a few searches and often on the first page.[9][10]
  • Many biographical articles contain religious references and information about the person’s religion, much more so than Wikipedia. Editor and college student Tasha Jones, (Taj) said of this aspect, “It gives me a better understanding of how people feel religion relates to our lives.” [11]
  • Conservapedia is active in political advocacy. For example, it chartered a bus for the 2009, 2010, and 2011 March for Life.

Conservapedia on atheism

See also: Conservapedia:Atheism articles statistics and Conservapedia Atheism Project

The Conservapedia atheism article has been well-received by theists, major Christian YouTube channels and has received other favorable reviews (see: Public commentary on Conservapedia's atheism article). The Freedom From Atheism Foundation has featured Conservapedia atheism content on their Facebook page which receives a considerable amount of social media traffic.

Conservapedia has one the largest collection of articles on atheism on the internet. Its main atheism article and its collection of atheism articles (mainly created using the User: Conservative account) have both received a considerable amount of web traffic. See: Conservapedia:Atheism articles statistics

Conservapedia has over 1,900+ atheism related articles, essays and humor/satire pieces.

From 2006-2016, negative views about atheism in the United States have sharpened (see: Essay:Views on atheists).[12]

Promoting Original Scholarship

Many pages tagged as essays are really more like projects, or are otherwise thought-provoking, giving Conservapedia some characteristics of a think tank. See Best New Conservative Words, The Coming Fifth Great Awakening in America, Top Causes of Rejecting Conservativism, Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?, Disputed Biblical Translations, and Linguistic Analysis of Candidates.

Conservapedia debate pages

Conservapedians are encouraged to engage in civil debates where both sides support their arguments using evidence and sound arguments.

Please see: Conservapedia:Debate Topics

See also

External links

Video on Conservapedia:

References

  1. ↑ Robert Siegel. Conservapedia: Data for Birds of a Political Feather?, npr.org, November 29, 2009.
  2. ↑ Wikipedia Project Cold War History, December 6, 2006. wikipedia.org
  3. ↑ https://rumble.com/v6vky6n-molyneux-mccarthyism-5-the-venona-cables.html
  4. ↑ TGP Interview with Andrew Schlafly, Conservapedia Founder, By Benjamin Wetmore, Sep. 5, 2023. www.thegatewaypundit.com
  5. ↑ "Episode 12087". The Daily Show. Comedy Central. Black highlighted Conservapedia's introductory sentence Template:Webarchive "homosexuality is an immoral sexual lifestyle." In response, he said: "On Conservapedia, 'gay' sounds way more interesting!"
  6. ↑ Atheist Persona: Causes and Consequences by John J. Pasquini, Th.D.
  7. ↑ Conservapedia influence on public perception of atheism
  8. ↑ Bootie Cosgrove-Mather. Poll: Creationism Trumps Evolution, CBS News, November 22, 2004.
  9. ↑ atheism - Google Search
  10. ↑ theory of evolution - Google Search
  11. ↑ Stephanie Simon. A conservative's answer to Wikipedia, Los Angeles Times, June 19, 2007.
  12. ↑ Atheists Remain Most Disliked Religious Minority in the US
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia&oldid=2200255"