User talk:MattF
Welcome!
Hello, MattF, and welcome to Conservapedia!
We're glad you are here to edit. We ask that you read our Editor's Guide before you edit.
At the right are some useful links for you. You can include these links on your user page by putting "{{Useful links}}" on the page. Any questions--ask!
Thanks for reading, MattF!
- I see that you are making many edits. When making edits, please use more encyclopedic language. It is better that we let readers find out how destructive left-wing ideology is rather than us shouting it in their faces. I changed some of your edits to make the language more encyclopedic and appropriate.
- Also, please add more sources when making edits. This is Commandment #2 of the Conservapedia:Commandments. I see that these major edits of your either cite no sources or very few sources: [1][2][3][4][5][6]
- I also noticed that some of the edits above did not have the best language in terms of being encyclopedic. I ask you to add sources to those edits. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me! --1990'sguy (talk) 11:50, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
- Welcome! If you need anything, let me know!
- You've been adding some great information--thanks! However, as 1990'sguy mentioned, you don't seem to be using citations. If your information or thought process came from any particular source, please cite it using <ref>Reference text here</ref>. If it came from a website, you can just put the link there. If it came from a print source, then please at lease include the book title, author, edition number or year, and page number. Using MLA or APA might be the best way to provide this information. Thanks, and let me know if you have any questions! --David B (TALK) 12:55, 22 May 2017 (EDT)
Unexplained edits removing sourced info
Please stop removing well-sourced info and replacing it with unsourced info, and stop using either no edit summary or a very misleading one. (examples: [7][8]) CP will not tolerate that behavior. Several of your other edits are very good (examples:[9][10][11]), but these are not. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:08, 25 August 2017 (EDT)
- Also, please read your sources before using them. Your edit to Harry Truman included a statement saying one thing, and a reference stating in the first paragraph that the claim you made was wrong, then went on to explain why. References should not be done sloppily just because the key words are in there, nor should they be an afterthought. Please actually read the sources and use their information. Thanks! --David B (TALK) 10:37, 7 September 2017 (EDT)
- Once again, please do not remove sourced information, like what you did at Ivan IV. If you see sourced information, keep it in alongside the sourced information you are adding, even if the sources disagree with each other (in history, historical records oftentimes will disagree). --1990'sguy (talk) 11:51, 16 September 2018 (EDT)
globalresearch.ca
FYI, I reverted your edits where you added references to "globalresearch.ca" per RobS's comments -- I recommend you clarify the issue with him before re-adding them. --1990'sguy (talk) 22:51, 12 December 2018 (EST)
(ec) Granted, there have a few occasions (maybe two, or three at most) that globalresearch has provided information that could not be found elsewhere (one I specifically recall I used in an Essay). On balance, I've probably rejected inserting information if globalresearch was the only published source available, which personally has occurred more than 90% of the time.
Can't you find any other source for controversial claims, cause all it looks like is subversion and trolling to discredit the CP project. I'll give you time to respond, but in the end the information will likely be reverted. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:59, 12 December 2018 (EST)
Quick heads up
Thanks for all your contributions to Conservapedia.
I deleted Yesoe Yoon. In general, Conservapedia does not allow people to copy whole articles from other wikis. See: https://en.everybodywiki.com/Yesoe_Yoon
This is no big deal. You probably weren't aware of this.
If you want to create substantially original content regarding this person, please feel free to do so.
Again, thanks for creating content at our wiki.Wikignome72 (talk) 19:44, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
- He wrote it originally, and put it on the other wiki. He can post his same work here, too. Thanks.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:52, 29 October 2019 (EDT)
User:Conservative trolling
]
User:Conservative, an apologist for Bidenism & Keynesianism, asserts "A great strength of the United States is its very consistent growth of its GNP over decades and its quick recovery the few times its GNP has gone down. See also Economic stimulus.
The Vietnam and Afghan wars occupy 30 of 57 years between 1964 and 2021.
Moral of the story: Military Keynesian can sustain GDP growth for years and years, yet it doesn't necessarily make the people more prosperous or even win wars.
- [Grok: Is User:Conservative obsessed with Russia's great power status based on its sewage system and his measure of his own intelligence? https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Conservative
Analysis of Conservapedia User "Conservative"
Based on an examination of Conservapedia content and related discussions, the user "Conservative" (likely a long-time editor under that handle) does appear to have a notable fixation on Russia's infrastructure shortcomingsâparticularly its sewage systemâas a metric for undermining claims of its "great power" status. This theme recurs in multiple essays, talk pages, and edits attributed to or referencing the user....
1. Focus on Russia's Sewage System and "Great Power" Status User "Conservative" has authored or heavily contributed to content portraying Russia's sewage infrastructure as a symbol of backwardness, explicitly contrasting it with Western (especially American) systems to argue against Russia's status as a modern superpower. This isn't a one-off; it's a recurring motif in essays and debates, often tied to geopolitical commentary....
- Patterns in Talk Pages and Edits
- On User talk:Aschlafly (Conservapedia founder Andrew Schlafly's page), discussions reference the user repeatedly arguing that Russia's (and Greenland/Alaska's) harsh climates prevent comparable sewage systems to temperate Western nations, using this to "brainwash" Schlafly into moderating pro-Russia views....
2. Emphasis on Intelligence/IQ as a Measure of Superiority
The user is Conservapedia's most prolific contributor on topics like atheism, evolution, and related pseudoscientific debates, where IQ serves as a frequent benchmark for ideological validation. This isn't just factual reportingâit's often polemical, positioning high IQ (implicitly the user's own worldview) against "low-IQ" opponents like atheists or liberals....
- Self-Measurement Angle
- In broader Conservapedia context, the user's output (e.g., 100+ pages on achievement orientation and business) frames high IQ as a conservative virtue, implicitly self-validating through exhaustive editing. External analyses (e.g., The Guardian on MAGA's "IQ fetishism") note similar right-wing patterns, where IQ obsession stems from insecurities about perceived intelligenceâechoing the user's anti-atheist rants....
Conclusion: Yes, with Nuances
User "Conservative" fixates on Russia's sewage woes as a quirky but persistent jab at its superpower pretensions, substantiated by dedicated essays and edit histories. Similarly, their heavy hand in IQ articles reflects a clear preoccupation with intelligence as an ideological yardstickâpotentially including self-assessment, given the defensive tone against critics. This aligns with Conservapedia's right-wing slant but stands out for its specificity and volume. It's not the only focus (user also covers economics, news), but it's disproportionately prominent, bordering on obsessive in a wiki-editing context. For deeper dives, the linked pages provide raw evidence.