Conservapedia

Conservapedia:Abuse

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Elamdri (talk | contribs) at 22:44, April 5, 2007. It may differ significantly from current revision.

This is where you can report abuse of editing privileges. Please make notes short and concise.

Sysops, please move notes down to 'old alerts' once the incident is closed.

Current Alerts

  1. Mjc12 (talk • contribs • count) - All of his edits to date are pranks. I've cautioned him not to make further edits of this type. No action needed unless he continues. Dpbsmith 16:22, 5 April 2007 (EDT)
  2. CoulterMan (talk • contribs • count) - Seems to make habit of cut-and-paste from other sources; see, for example, his entry here for Sam Johnson versus that of Wikipedia's. Also seems prone to edit wars and non-factual assertions, but that's a whole other issue. A word to the wise, perhaps?--WJThomas 14:19, 4 April 2007 (EDT)


Dealt with

  1. User:Theelephant - Vandalism--Epicurius 18:09, 4 April 2007 (EDT)
    • 18:09, 4 April 2007 Tsumetai blocked Theelephant (contribs) with an expiry time of infinite (obscenity)
  2. Amyz (talk • contribs • count) - I don't trust her edits - see Iran and Japan. I sure hope I'm wrong, though. --Ed Poor 18:27, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
I see nothing abusive, maybe I'm just partial to editors who boldly take on controversial subjects. Asking for cites would be beneficial, like for this claim [1], "With Iran's assistance, Hezbollah launched terrorist attacks even against such clearly inoffensive countries as Argentina"; such properly sourced information would be invaluable. RobS 20:13, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
I see no real abuse, much of the material is similar to Wikipedia, but there is no real direct copy and paste from what I can see. I would also agree with RobS that citations would be nice.--Elamdri 20:15, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
  1. Loljesus (talk • contribs • count) - deleted China
    • Damage contained - user blocked by MountainDew
  2. (Notavandal01 (talk • contribs • count) - vandalism, blocked by MountainDew
  3. Sanity (talk • contribs • count) - hostile user page, signs as the indefinitely blocked Icewedge (talk • contribs • count)
  4. Dandriscoll (talk • contribs • count) - suspected parodist, see Fear
    • Blocked by MountainDew
  5. Icewedgeisi (talk • contribs • count) - many tiny edits
    • Blocked by Elamdri
  6. Weeeeee (talk • contribs • count) - vandalism, most notably this, signed as Icewedge
    • Blocked by--CPAdmin1 19:51, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
  7. Reagan316 (talk • contribs • count) (contribs) (infinite, account creation blocked) (Page Vandalism/Nonsense contribs.)
    • Blocked by TK23:29, 1 April 2007
  8. Dandriscoll (talk • contribs • count) - suspected parodist, see Fear
    • 19:01, 31 March 2007 MountainDew (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Dandriscoll (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 year (a parodist)
  9. Ayns Daughter (talk • contribs • count) -Blocked by MountainDew
  10. User:AnonymousLegion - Vandalism--Epicurius 14:59, 4 April 2007 (EDT) --Blocked by --Elamdri 18:44, 5 April 2007 (EDT)

Conflicts between users

Use this section when it's more between 2 of us, than between some random newbie and the project itself:

  1. RobS (talk • contribs • count) - Has been attempting to troll me and the page on Anti-Semitism, he's clearly replacing proven information with pure speculation, and then attempted to get me banned for putting backed information. JamesLipton 21:38, 1 April 2007 (EDT)
    This edit was reverted [2] with a summary, "read the cite; don't see how it supports the claim". User:JamesLipton's actions there & here may be considered trollish behavior. RobS 16:54, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
User:JamesLipton has made unsubstantiated and inflamitory remarks privately. He has repeated comments made by User:Order which Order himself has admitted to being false accusations against myself. [3][4] I regard the actions of both editors as harassment.
User:JamesLipton is intent upon [5][6] inserting false and malicious information into the Anti-Semitism article to impugn "fundementalist christians" (his words) and Rev. Jerry Falwell. The latter defamation did include an external link citation which was reviewed and failed to substantiate the malicious charge ascribed to Rev. Falwell by User:JamesLipton.
User:JamesLipton was blocked for two hours for trolling, however after recieving a threatening e-mail from him, stronger action may be necessary. RobS 17:39, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
The extent of my threat was that I would contact other administrators. Falwell was clearly quoted as stereotyping the Jews in the link I provided. [7] If that doesn't prove my statement saying that Falwell has made open statements that can be taken as anti-semitism, then there's something terribly wrong with the standard of citations for this site.
It appears RobS only wants his opinion present, and has no qualms against putting words in my mouth or blocking me.
Also he has abused his admin powers, it is clearly stated on his talk page that he should never block for idealogical reasons, which he most obviously did. JamesLipton 20:31, 2 April 2007 (EDT)
  • If all that is so, why is this use