Conservapedia:Community Portal

(this page redirects from CP:COMPORT) This is the place to discuss issues of interest to the Conservapedia community.

Community Portal/Archives

This page contains some material that has been moved from Talk:Main_Page. We are attempting to get general discussion of issues relating to Conservapedia's content and policies on this page, leaving the main talk page for its original purpose of discussing the content of the Main Page.

Improvising Template:Officeholder/senator...

Hello, I'd like to request an administrator to make a following change to Template:Officeholder/senator, since I can't simply edit it due to the template being locked. As far as I know, whenever the template is used in a page, all the information needs to be filled properly for everything to appear in the correct manner. This means that if the information about the state isn't filled in, {{{state}}} will show up, and if the terms aren't filled in, {{{terms}}} will show up, etc. (the only exception is the “|succeeded=”, as “Incumbent (no successor)” shows up if left blank) However, the “|former=(y or n)” is the only exception, as if it's left out, it's automatically assumed that “former=n”, as it's only necessary to imply that a senator has left office. I would like to request replacing this part with a part such that:

• when using the Template:Officeholder/senator, it would be filled as “|status=(s, j, or f)”
• if the information is not inputted, “{{{status}}}” would simply show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
• if “|status=s”, then “Senior” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
• if “|status=j”, then “Junior” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
• if “|status=f”, then “Former” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”
• if “|status=(anything filled in except for s, j, or f)”, then “{{{status}}}” will show up before “U.S. Senator from {{{state}}}”

--Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 15:39, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

Oh, that's a problem. Writing/editing templates gives me a headache, but I might be able to fix this. If it is unlocked, would you be able to fix it? --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 15:47, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

No, unfortunately I wouldn't be able to do it by myself. Having joined this site less than a year ago (see here), I have gained much experience with CP formatting, but I'm not a hard-core expert, especially not with formatting for creating/improvising templates. While I can somewhat comprehend how certain inputs in template source codes correspond to certain functions (as I've done such in analyzing to fix this template), I don't know enough to add in all the necessary information for my proposed improvisation. Since the template was locked anyway, I was hoping that a sysop would be able to do it. --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 16:08, 31 March 2020 (EDT)

Update: I was able to improvise the template. --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 13:21, 3 April 2020 (EDT)

Fixing a mistake using the Infobox officeholder template...

Hello, I just created this page that includes Template:Infobox officeholder, but I don't understand how the formatting works when adding military info. I analyzed the source of the template, but I still don't understand how to fix the error. Can someone figure it out and fix it on the page? I have no idea. Thanks! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 22:41, 10 April 2020 (EDT)

I went through the same thing on Gen. Mike Flynn's page. It was a nightmare. Here's how I fixed it, if it's any help. RobS^{De Plorabus Unum} 22:57, 12 April 2020 (EDT)

I just added a "|military=y" in the template in the Donald Bolduc page, but that didn't seem to make a difference. Also, the template used in the Michael T. Flynn page is Template:Officeholder, and the one used in the Donald Bolduc page is Template:Infobox officeholder. --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 23:10, 12 April 2020 (EDT)

Question about files that can be uploaded under Fair use...

Just curious, can Getty images be uploaded to CP under the Fair Use license? Thanks! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 13:51, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Probably not. That's why Getty has a watermark. RobS^{De Plorabus Unum} 14:02, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Okay, thank you RobSmith! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 14:10, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Agreed, Getty is a company which makes money from the sale of images. This sort of company is not going to appreciate it if we try to make a "Fair Use" claim on them. --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 14:16, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Thank you for the further specification, DavidB4! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 14:25, 14 April 2020 (EDT)

Please look into this

https://www.conservapedia.com/Communications_Act_of_1934 this page is pretty vauge then has a hyper-link to this liberal site https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/LSB10082.pdf which is written by this democrat liberal who works for the ACLU of all places. https://www.aclu.org/news/by/kate-ruane/ so if someone could change this or look into it, thanks.

FAS is a CIA front; I don't know if it should be described as "liberal". Sounds conspiratorial. RobS^{De Plorabus Unum} 17:17, 18 April 2020 (EDT)

Changing font colors...

Susan Collins (likely nominee)	Sara Gideon (likely nominee)

Just curious, how do I make words appear in a dark red or dark blue color? I know how the formatting works, but I'm not sure what keywords to use for dark red and dark blue. Thanks! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 20:19, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

Dark red I've had problems with so I use brown; for dark blue try boldening.

Red

Brown

Dark blue

Not sure if this helps, but it's the best I can do. RobS^{Live Free or Die} 20:47, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

Thanks for the suggestion RobSmith, and here's the thing. So I created this page, and I was initially thinking of using dark red and dark blue for the font colors in the wikitable for Susan Collins and Sara Gideon respectively, thinking that it would contrast with the generic red/blue colors for internal links, but after closely observing the colors after your reply, it turns out that the regular red and blue colors differ from the generic colors for wikified text. However, there is also another problem. For the situation where I'm trying to change the font color, it seems that apparently font color can't be changed in a wikitable, or something else. I used a wikitable as I couldn't figure out a way to put one image directly to the left of another, and it seems that this issue with font color formatting arises.. --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 21:43, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

So are you trying to contrast GOP for red and Dem for blue? Maybe a miniicon like this or somesuch formatting. RobS^{Live Free or Die} 22:02, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

Great suggestion RobSmith; I just tried it and I think it works quite well! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 22:34, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

If it helps, you can also use a hex color code, like style="color:#000000" to indicate black. With a little trial and error (or a hex color picking tool) you could probably get it pretty close. If you want to match a specific color, you can get that code too. You could take a screenshot of that color, open it in a photo editor which tells you color codes (like gimp), and get the exact code you need. Or, if you use Firefox, open the menu, and select "Web Developer", then "Eyedropper" and move the pointer the color you want the code for. Using the default style, red links seem to be about "#c60000" and blue links seem to be about "#3366bb". I didn't test those though, so slight tweaks may be needed to get it exactly right. --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 22:12, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

That's a great idea DavidB4, but the problem is that I can't figure out a way to code that into the source properly. I tried using <span style="(etc.)"</span>, but it didn't seem to work. I think it probably has to do with the way the wikitable functions, but I'm not entirely sure. Since I used what RobSmith suggested, the party affiliations are distinguished, so I suppose the font colors don't really need to be changed, though I do very much appreciate your suggestion! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 22:34, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

I am curious though, is there a way such that if two images are aligned to the right, that one image is directly to the left of the other? --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 22:37, 25 April 2020 (EDT)

For plain text, you can just use "<font color="000000">Colored text</font>". Wouldn't that work? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the problem. Anyway, I'm glad Rob's suggestion is working! --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 00:40, 26 April 2020 (EDT)

McSally Derangement Syndrome

Just wondering, is it about time for Conservapedia to coin the term "McSally Derangement Syndrome" and make a page about it? After all, the liberal hatred for Martha McSally has been getting worse and worse, given the snowflakes erupting all over the internet, the establishment media being somewhat biased towards the senator, and even idiotic websites having been created as smears, all for the purpose of trying to oust McSally this election year. --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 12:39, 3 May 2020 (EDT)

I tend to shy away from inventing terms, but I'm not firmly opposed to it, if this seems like a useful topic to others. I suspect that most snowflakes doesn't even know who McSally is, but they do know who Trump is. This seems to better justify having an article on the latter than the former. --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 00:32, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

About TDS, it seems that 1990'sguy already created the page a few years ago. And about McSally, while some snowflakes may not have heard of her, those who do tend to despise her and constantly tout her likely 2020 Democrat opponent Mark Kelly. For example, after the "liberal hack" rebuke against Manu Raju, there was a massive left-wing meltdown that McSally would *dare insult a CNN reporter*. Many have also used McSally's vote against Obamacare to ridiculously argue that she is somehow opposed to protection for pre-existing conditions, despite the fact that the Republican-led repeal efforts does provide a certain degree of protection for such. Also, on The Hill, I always notice in the articles about the senator that the comment sections are filled to the brim with idiotic liberal remarks, such as touting Mark Kelly's little-known military record while blatantly ignoring McSally's Air Force record as a combat fighter for two decades (I noticed the idiocy when citing The Hill as a biased establishment media outlet here). And that's not to mention the "opinion" articles on AZ Central attacking the senator. As well as the threat by a Tuscon man in 2018, etc. Overall, given this as a major election year, liberals are pouring a massive effort to unseat McSally, and their nonsensical rhetoric getting out of hand. Thus, I suppose whether the page should be made or not could be up for consideration at the moment, as it's possible other editors may have certain disagreements. And I do appreciate your input, DavidB4! --Liberaltears^{Your reminder that Biden committed quid pro joe} 01:08, 5 May 2020 (EDT)

ICO file to highlight Conservapedia tab on browser

Most websites have a little jpg pic for the tab, like wikipedia or wordpress have a blue letter W. This helps people keep track of sites when they have multiple tabs open. It is done with a tiny image file with an .ico extension. It would need to be inserted somewhere in the site settings. (Without an ico or icon file, the tab presents on the browser as a plain blank rectangle.)

Information Box

I've been working on a page for a World War I battle recently, and I want to add an information box at the top to include some of the basic facts and statistics. But I don't know for sure if I need to create a new template for that, or if there's an existing one I can apply: some exist for other wars like the Revolutionary War, but I can't tell if they will carry over to World War I or another conflict. Any ideas? -Teakin88

I'm using the WWII battle Template on 2020 Leftist insurrection. You could just cut n paste that one. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 23:39, 2 August 2020 (EDT)

Thanks Rob! That was very useful. -Teakin88

Is it OK for me to copy stuff I wrote on Wikipedia to here?

I am primarily a Wikipedia editor. (Feel free to check me out, my username is the same there.) I don't really prefer reading here because I think this site is very opinionated and derogatory to many people, and I do not agree with all the views of this site, even though I am a Christian. However, I don't really mind copying my contributions to this and other wikis. Is it OK (for non-politically related subjects)? Thanks! Félix An (talk) 21:40, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

If it's your own work in your own words, then I believe it's fine. —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!} Thursday, 21:43, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

Thanks! Which sources can I cite here that are considered "reliable"? Félix An (talk) 21:53, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

I don't believe there to be a very detailed guide on that. Just go with sources that you can instinctually trust and don't seem sketchy. For example, Wikipedia should not be cited unless it's to prove the latter's liberal bias. Most conservative sites like Breitbart, Townhall.com, and the Daily Caller are great. Just keep in mind that the main reason for citing references is to back up whatever points you're trying to make on the articles you're editing on. If you cite anything that contains inappropriate language/content in any context, then it's important that you specify in the reference whatever that needs to warned for readers. Hope this helps. —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!} Thursday, 22:07, 5 August 2020 (EDT)

Access Issues

Has anyone else been encountering serious problems accessing Conservapedia the last few days? It seems like half the time I get on here, I'm met with an error message: "Internal Server Error," "Gateway Timeout," "Unauthorized," etc. It isn't all the time, but it's often enough to be frustrating, and if I'm not the only one, it needs to be sorted out. -Teakin88

The DNC and their allied CCP hackers don't like the message getting out, so they are attempting to suppress information. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 15:06, 10 August 2020 (EDT)

My recent edits have disappeared--again. Does anyone know what is going on??? -Teakin88

I have no idea what's happening either. Also, I had just mentioned about the issue here. —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier be well! | Don't be an anti-Catholic zealot!} Wednesday, 11:04, 19 August 2020 (EDT)

Continuing to figure things out now. We have and will restore some of the edits. Sorry for the unexpected disruption!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 14:42, 19 August 2020 (EDT)

Request to change article on homosexuality

Hey, nice work guys, I really love the articles. One thing I have noticed though is the lack of articles like "arguments FOR homosexuality." Now, I'm just as God-fearing as the rest of you, and I refuse to buy into the Homosexual Agenda as well, but if we want this place to maintain its non-partisanship, we should address both sides and deal with the Left's arguments accordingly. I was thinking about changing the existing debate articles by also including arguments for both sides. I have seen these leftists bring up some terrible points lately and I have just wanted to address them with this wonderful community - LeftistSchools

You have to be an expert to talk about certain things discreetly. After all, the Bible says about some: "What they do is too shameful to discuss." Is that how you spell God-fearing? VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 10:07, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

I'd suggest a Debate page rather than a mainspace article at this point. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 12:43, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

My bad, I missed that typo when I was writing this up. It has been fixed. I believe you referenced Ephesians 5:12? Just before that verse, does it not also say that we should "Have nothing to do with the fruitless deeds of darkness, but rather expose them?" I agree with RobSmith in that a debate page should be set up. Active discussion must be involved if we are to expose the deeds of darkness - User:LeftistSchools

Verse 12 actually reads, For it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret. RobS^{Trump 2Q2Q} 18:46, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

The Holy Apostle says to expose "the futile works of darkness" by contrast through seeking "complete goodness and right living and truth." It is also written, "cast not your pearls before swine, lest they trample them." The argument is over. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 20:16, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

Ham and eggs

If you say you have ham and eggs, you must have at least some ham or some eggs. If you switch steak for ham and switch oatmeal for eggs, how can you still say you have "ham and eggs"? That shouldn't be difficult to understand. VargasMilan (talk) Tuesday, 10:36, 25 August 2020 (EDT)

Night mode

Just wondering, is it just me, or is night mode not around anymore? Usually for a certain time period when night mode's on, account creation is disabled for everyone (except administrators), and editing is limited to those with the "Administrator" or "edit" tag. This usually prevents trolls from vandalizing when most editors aren't as active on CP. —Liberaltears^{May Dataclarifier's mother be all well!} Wednesday, 13:56, 9 September 2020 (EDT)

More server issues

Is it just me, or does it occur for anyone else editing that CP would function normally for around nine minutes, then won't load for the next six minutes, with the process repeating? —Liberaltears^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Thursday, 23:47, 23 September 2020 (EDT)

I typically can make 2 or 3 edits, purge the history for the past hour, and can re-edit. I'm rotating between 4 browsers to do it. It's been happening for about 3 days. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 00:07, 24 September 2020 (EDT)

Ah, I see. I'll try purging my browser cache and see if it helps to at least partially resolve the nuisance. Thanks for the reply!
—Liberaltears^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Thursday, 00:15, 24 September 2020 (EDT)

Hello

I'm new to Conservapedia, and I was wondering if there is a category for articles that need improvements? Such as spell-checking, adding wikilinks to dead-end articles, etc. Things that are easy to help me get familiar with the process of editing here. Thanks. MAGAViking (talk) 19:27, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

If you look at the left side on any CP page and under "Edit Console", there's a link that says "Special pages". That lists some maintenance reports, including dead-end pages, etc. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Saturday, 19:36, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

(ec)

No, but that's a good idea. Here's a suggestion: you could look at Popular Pages, and begin with the newer ones that seemingly are receiving the most traffic right now. Thanks! RobS^{Free Kyle!} 19:38, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

Thank you for the suggestions! MAGAViking (talk) 19:45, 24 October 2020 (EDT)

"President Biden"

So, although I hope and pray that the courts do the right thing and invalidate the voter fraud occurring, there is of course the possibility that Joe Biden will be taking the oath of office on January 20th.

However, since it is now obvious that he will have only done so by stealing the election, I think it is necessary for Conservapedia to determine its policy on referring to Trump and Biden in that scenario. My position is, since Biden did not lawfully win the election, he cannot truly be considered President, and therefore the page(s) devoted to him should not label him as such. Similarly, the page on Donald Trump should state that he remains the actual President (though of course an explanation will be necessary, that he is not able at the moment to exercise the powers of the Presidency).

Again, that's my position. What say others? -Teakin88

Do you believe everything the MSM and Big Tech says? RobS^{Free Kyle!} 15:43, 6 November 2020 (EST)

No. I do believe that the Democrats will try to steal it, and that the institutions which are supposed to stand in the way of that are too corrupt to be automatically trusted to do so. So my question remains--is the Conservapedia policy going to be to continue to acknowledge Trump as the lawful President, even if the worst comes to pass? Teakin88

Trump remains the President and Joe Biden remains a suspected agent of a foreign power. RobS^{Free Kyle!}

I don't think the presidential election is over in Wisconsin. As the old saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Saturday, 15:06, 7 November 2020 (EST)

2020 results

Georgia and North Carolina have finally been called, giving Biden a winning Electoral College tally of 306 to 232. The popular vote was 51 percent (78.7 million) for Biden to 47 percent (73.1 million) for Trump. The total presidential vote was 13.2 percent higher than in 2016.[1] On election day, Biden's net approval was at +6.2 compared to -12.8 for Trump.[2] On election day 2016, Clinton had a net approval of -12.6 while Trump had -21.[3] So Trump could cover a 8.4 gap in his favorability numbers, but apparently not a 19 point gap.

From the chart, I'd say the Trump campaign was on track until the riots hit at the end of May. In others words, we can't blame covid. But we can blame Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, who refused to send in the troops to recover the two police stations that were siezed by the rioters -- at least not without a request from the local governor. What are we to make of the Democratic governors, who sacrificed their own states to the rioters rather than request federal aid? Are they telling their own voters that they are a bunch of racists who had it coming? Jay Inslee in Washington State was reelected by a whopping margin of 57 percent to 43 percent. Inslee called up 200 guardsmen to clear the highways at one point, but only laughed when asked about CHAZ. The state is so blue that riots aren't even controversial.

There is also the odd phenomenon of Republican candidates being nearly tied with Democrats in the House vote and in other downballot votes, despite the fact that Republicans lost the White House by a significant margin. We can expect a Republican sweep in the midterms. Four years of Trump news has exhausted all of us. It seems that a significant number of voters were hoping that ousting Trump and electing Republicans to Congress would give us a break from all the drama. Of course, the problem here is not so much anything Trump has actually done as the hysterical way that the media reacts to him. I certainly hope Trump is not back in 2024 and that the nomination goes to someone like Vice President Mike Pence or Senator Tom Cotton. PeterKa (talk) 00:22, 15 November 2020 (EST)

The ticket-splitting may have been more in some liberal-leaning districts like the ones that propelled Young Kim, Maria Elvira Salazar, Carlos Gimenez, Michelle Steel to victory. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Sunday, 00:39, 15 November 2020 (EST)

Also, the problem with a candidate other than Trump is that they may not have the populist-approach appeal to some voters that were crucial to his 2016 victory. By the way PeterKa, do you live in Washington? —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Sunday, 00:44, 15 November 2020 (EST)

As of late, I have not followed the 2020 election news closely. But knowing that Donald Trump is a "New Yorker fighter", he will likely run again in 2024 if he does not win in 2020. He may launch a news website/channel too as a prelude to 2024. In addition, Trump has a big ego which could also cause him to run in 2024 should he lose the 2020 election. Furthermore, I can't see Trump letting his very loyal fans down.

U.S. President Grover Cleveland was elected non-consecutive terms and he was a New Yorker.Conservative (talk) 01:17, 15 November 2020 (EST)

Yeah, I got to vote against Inslee and the state's appalling plan to teach sex education starting in the fifth grade.[4] Sadly, there is not much reason for a conservative to vote in Washington State.

In the argot of campaign strategists, Trump commits the sins of going off message and shooting down (attacking targets not worthy of his attention). Just by fixing those problems, he could go up 2 to 3 points in the polls. He'll be 78 on election day 2024. That's a year older than Biden is now. PeterKa (talk) 02:51, 15 November 2020 (EST)

Trump has a lot of energy (I think he might have ADHD). He is like the energy bunny. Barring circulatory problems such as a stroke or heart attack, Trump will run again in 2024.Conservative (talk) 07:56, 15 November 2020 (EST)

Continuous loading problems

CP continues to have loading problems. Often I'm trying to edit the House elections page, and after some updates, the site won't load for a few minutes. This type of issue happens over and over, and it drains my time. When will this be resolved? I really like editing here, though I wish the site could be more efficient than it currently is. Thanks! —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Monday, 23:08, 15 November 2020 (EST)

I'm suspecting that, like last time, this may be the result of attempted DDOS attacks by leftists who don't want people to see the truth as it comes out. They're becoming increasingly desperate and they wouldn't be acting this way if they didn't have anything to fear. Northwest (talk) 21:12, 16 November 2020 (EST)

A larger problem with CP right now is that page views don't go up the way it used to, which probably could've been caused by those very server errors currently wasting my time. My page creations months ago such as this, this, this, and this all quickly got very high numbers despite very few revisions for them. If those leftists were trying to block off people from seeing the truth we're putting out, especially with updates related to the presidential, Senate, and House elections, they might've partially succeeded. Based off here, it seems that total page views are going up steadily, though I don't know what pages account for that, though this seems like one of them. However, ever since those series of annoying problems in August, CP's page view numbers for new page creations has dwindled over time. Now, one of my observations is that CP eliminated the www. from its URL, which may or may not have an impact. Another thing I noticed is that much of the page views could've simply been siphoned off to here due to those 403.shtml errors popping up. Right now, I just hope Andy can fix those loading problems soon, as I often am trying to update the 2020 U.S. House elections page and find out three seconds later that the page won't load. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Tuesday, 21:29, 16 November 2020 (EST)

Aaand we just got DDOSed for a day. Wow. Leftists are p*ssed. Sievert 81 (talk) 19:07, 17 November 2020 (EST)

Conceding an election: Carter versus Trump

Fer nearly two weeks, the media has been whining about Trump's failure to concede gracefully. Okay, I guess he should. But what Democrat has ever conceded gracefully? The New York Times is still running articles that accuse Nixon of stealing the 1968 election from Humphrey by communicating with the South Vietnamese president. In 2016, Hillary's campaign wanted the Electoral College briefed on Trump's supposed treason with the Russians. Were they supposed to undo the popular vote? Meanwhile, Carter's former aides are fighting for vindication by accusing Reagan of conspiring with the ayatollahs. Here is Anne Coulter, brillant as usual: "Gee, Why Can't Trump Accept Defeat Like the Democrats?" PeterKa (talk) 08:29, 19 November 2020 (EST)

Given the circumstances of this election, it's obvious that there was unprecedented fraud in favor of Biden. Also, Ann Coulter hasn't been on the right side of the issues every time; remember when she said Trump "deserved" to lose? The lack of progress in reaching some goals in border security had nearly all to do with the Trump agenda blocked by the courts, so blaming it on Trump was rather unfair and ridiculous. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Thursday, 08:38, 19 November 2020 (EST)

Here is a 1988 Playboy cover promoting the "October surprise" theory of the 1980 election that I thought was pretty funny. ("Mom, I just got it for the crazy conspiracy theory! Honest!")

Trump's political career was both created and undone by Celebrity Apprentice and CNN, with Jeff Zucker presiding over both. Biden could be our most anti-Christian president ever, a Christian-bashing Catholic backed up by a Marxist pope and a Catholic-hating veep. Obama was elected as a Christian and shifted to Christian-bashing toward the end of his first term. We had five unitarian presidents, namely Jefferson, John Adams, John Quincy Adams, Filmore, and Taft. Perhaps Pence can bring us back to Nicene-creed orthodoxy.

Liberals remain hysterical about whatever Trump happens to be doing. HuffPost is accusing him of "undermining democracy." Stacy Abrams lost the 2018 Georgia governor's race by 50 to 49 point margin. Ever since, she has been accusing Republicans of "voter suppression," whatever that means. But she isn't undermining democracy, at least not to according to the liberal media. In fact, they treat Abrams as a hero precisely because of this unsportsmanlike behavior.

As for Coulter, I think she has been giving Trump good advise. When the rioters took the police station in Minneapolis, she immediately tweeted that Trump should send in the troops. This was certianly a missed opportunity, one of the few Trump had to reset the race in his favor. PeterKa (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2020 (EST)

Biden opens the border. What happened to covid?

What is the No. 1 policy priority of the incoming Biden administration? Covid? Global warming? Racial justice? No, no, and no. It is increasing the level of immigration in order to create more Democrat voters. With the media in peak covid hysteria, Biden has announced that he is going to let in more illegal immigrants. This is on top of the increase in legal refugees that he told us about last week. Not only will he stop wall construction, but he will also freeze deportations for 100 days. This may be a preliminary to ending deportation altogether. If that's not incentive enough, illegals will get free health care, including the covid vaccine. This is early, specific, action that suggests that Biden prioritizes opening the border over almost every other issue.

Current American citizens are not the constituency that Biden is appealing to. Only 34 percent of Americans want an increase in immigration, according to Gallup's lastest poll of this issue, which was taken on May 28-June 4. The idea of giving illegal immigrants free health care is both hugely unpopular and economically unsustainable. You can think of Bidenism as a reversed image of democracy. The country would be run, not for the benefit its citizens or even its current residents, but for non-citizens who now live outside its boundaries. See "Poll: 67% Of Likely Voters Say Illegal Immigration Is A Serious Problem, Most Believe Democrats Don't Want To Stop It" and "Biden’s COVID Plan: Close The Economy, Open The Border." PeterKa (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2020 (EST)

The future of the Republican party

Vice President Mike Pence looks awesomely presidential in this video. You won't get past a Pence-led Space Force, you filthy Martians! PeterKa (talk) 12:34, 22 November 2020 (EST)

An observation about the Gateway Timeouts

The Gateway Timeouts always appear to happen at the same frequency in terms of their occurrence. They seem to show up three times every hour, lasting for five minutes each time then going away for fifteen minutes only to show up again. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Tuesday, 22:52, 23 November 2020 (EST)

What happened to Matt Drudge?

For many years, Matt Drudge was the top source of conservative news. In 2018-2019, his site gradually moved to the left. Nowadays, it is just another news aggregator. Viewship has declined sharply. What kind of business model is that? Perhaps Drudge sold out to some liberal billionaire. But who, when, and why? This story follows the rabbit hole as far down as it goes. In the summer on 2019, Drudge switched the site's advertising account to a company owned by Margaret Otto. She lives in Mountain View, California and is the wife of Adrian Otto, an executive at Google. The pair has been managing server traffic for the Drudge Report since at least 2005.

The writer didn't come up with anyone beside the Ottos who is directly connected to the site: no interns, no editors, no sign of what happened to Drudge himself. It seems that everything is automated. Drudge Report is in the process of the being transformed into a scam site. Since August, it has been running "hidden ads" they charge the advertiser for, but that don't actually appear on the site. PeterKa (talk) 04:08, 26 November 2020 (EST)

Happy Thanksgiving!

Happy Thanksgiving, and THANK YOU to all the dedicated, hardworking editors on CP here! —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Friday, 22:57, 26 November 2020 (EST)

Saxon math

In a Biden presidency, the teacher's unions will be in driver's seat when it comes to education policy. So we can expect a lot more "anti-racist education." Pretty much every Democrat, including Biden himself, has called Trump a racist. Calling Trump supporters racists is common as well. Biden calls us "uglies" and "chumps." In short, "anti-racist" really means anti-American. A lot of parents may soon give homeschooling another look.

American Thinker has an enthusiastic report on Saxon math, a popular sequence of homeschooling classes. Saxon got a frontpage National Review story back in the 1980s. AT recommends the pre-2007 editions. On Amazon, I didn't find later editions for sale, aside from a couple of workbooks. The New York Post also recommends Saxon. Here is a story about a school that switched from Saxon to another brand. The teachers complained that Saxon is repetitious. But is that really a flaw? The teacher can always adjust the pace and not every student needs to cover every problem. Here is a 1993 study that found that the Saxon method was effective. PeterKa (talk) 09:05, 27 November 2020 (EST)

New topic: Trump Victory

How are you all feeling about Trump's likelihood of being named victor in the presidential election? His team's lawsuits don't seem to have had any positive results. I'm starting to lose faith that he'll be awarded a second term by the Electoral College. --IScott (talk) 18:14, 4 December 2020 (EST)

The more illegal vote fraud committed by the Democrats that gets exposed (and more and more of it is getting exposed day by day), the less and less likely it is that the Democrats will be able to retain any semblance of power, much less get Biden into the White House. Not only is Trump getting his second term (as, by all rights, Biden basically legally forfeited the election the moment it was discovered that the Democrats illegally cheated on his behalf), but it's a given that there will be massive fallout from this as he invokes EO 13848 (regarding illegal foreign interference in a United States election), which would allow the Trump administration to legally seize the assets of companies (including Facebook, Twitter and Google/YouTube) and individuals (which could even include members of the liberal media) that were complicit (whether by aiding or covering up) in said foreign interference. This may very well also lead to the end of the Democrat Party as many of its members, along with their operatives, end up going to prison and face military tribunals for electoral fraud, sedition, insurrection (with intent of violently overthrowing the duly elected US Government) and many other crimes - and in the case of Democrats who committed treason (and there are quite a few of them), they would potentially face execution for that crime. Northwest (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2020 (EST)

Wait, we can contact the Trump Campaign and show Conservapedia sources the necessary evidence. --United States (talk) 18:48, 4 December 2020 (EST)

The Secretary of State for California certified for Biden today.[5] That gives the Democrats a certified majority in the Electoral College. So it is no longer possible for election fraud lawsuits to overturn the election. I suppose we could go the Hillary Clinton route and demand that the Electoral College be briefed on Hunter's corruption and how Joe is a treasonous stooge of China, or at least was for many years. In July, the Supreme Court affirmed unanimously that state laws binding electors are valid.[6] Thirty-two states have laws of this kind. The governors count the electors's votes. They can presumably disregard votes of the kind that SCOTUS has now ruled illegal. PeterKa (talk) 10:26, 5 December 2020 (EST)

California is just very Democrat, how about the toss-ups? --United States 11:08, 5 December 2020 (EST)

Here is the certification site. Only Missouri and New Jersey remain uncertified at this point. Trump can't win without Pennsylvania. The U.S. Third Circuit upheld Pennsylvania's certification on November 27, so the legal options seem to have run out there. PeterKa (talk) 12:13, 5 December 2020 (EST)

That looks absolutely bogus to me (and may, in fact, be one of numerous psy-ops ploys being employed by the Left to try to demoralize and discourage our side) and I'm not about to buy it, especially considering that Trump still has other avenues to go to get the illegal Democrat vote fraud overturned in the swing states and elsewhere. In addition to him invoking EO 13848, if the SCOTUS is intimidated by the criminals in the Democrat Party to not rule as they should and declare the election in Trump's favor (which he rightfully won anyway, as all votes that came in after the closing of polls at 8:00 p.m. local time are invalid and don't count under federal election rules), then he'll have no choice but to invoke the Insurrection Act of 1807 against the Democrats, their operatives and their brownshirts to deep-six their illegal coup (which the vote fraud they're committing is a part of). Northwest (talk) 13:54, 5 December 2020 (EST)

Various states encouraged non-citizens to vote, notably California. But these states tend to be "deep blue" anyway. So this type of fraud would effect the popular vote more than the Electoral College vote. Every state should require voter ID. Whether fraud is an issue or not, it would make people take the process of voting more seriously.

The latest is that the Dems are calling for Trump's lawyers to be sanctioned. What about Gore's lawyers, who pushed the "hand recount" nonsense back in 2000? There was no basis in Florida law for counting votes by hand. Furthermore, there is no reason to think that this method is more accurate than a machine count. Ron Klain, who headed Gore's recount effort, is now White House chief of staff. In short, there is no shame in trying to cheat your way to victory if you are a Democrat. PeterKa (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2020 (EST)

The thing with that is, though, those who were witnesses first-hand to the vote fraud as they took part in it are now starting to feel shame and are speaking out against it due to the reawakening of their consciences. The more hardcore "true believer" Democrats may not feel that way now, but they're going to have their "come to Jesus" moment the moment arrests for vote fraud (and related crimes) start being made. Northwest (talk) 13:15, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Also, Biden again defended China. That just gives me a headache. --United States (talk) 13:15, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Will fraud allegations keep Republicans from the Georgia polls?

The Russia collusion hoax went on for years. Hillary could spend $2 billion on her campaign and millions voted. But up against Russian bots and $100,000 worth of ridiculous Facebook ads, she didn't have a chance. I don't recall that the media ever worried about the sanity of people who believed such nonsense.

When Mueller finally testified, it turned out that the man was an empty shell, or at any rate a guy with better things to do than read the Mueller Report or worry about whether Russians were colluding with "Trimp," as he called the president. Liberals didn't skip a beat. They moved right along to the Ukraine phone call issue. Why can't Trump ask anyone he likes to investigate Biden? Running for president certainly didn't give Trump any kind of immunity.

That's why it's so thoughtful of the media to be concerned that Georgia Republicans will become so discombobulated by the allegations of fraud in the presidential election that they will neglect to vote in the all-important Senate runoffs on January 5. See "Faith shaken in system, Trump’s Georgia supporters consider skipping U.S. Senate runoffs." The headline may sound like parody, but this article is the real deal. Apparently, there was a townhall where attendees asked the state Republican chairwoman why Republicans should invest time or money in the runoffs. What do want to bet those people were Democrats? PeterKa (talk) 06:50, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Rumor is, Durham has expanded his probe to include election fraud. Durham was appointed as special counsel in October. Special Counsels must be appointed from outside government. THis means Durham must have privately retired as a US Attorney at some point. Is firing a Special Counsel an impeachable offense? RobS^{Free Kyle!} 15:37, 6 December 2020 (EST)

Patrick Fitzgerald, special counsel in the Plame case, was also a serving U.S. attorney. He was appointed by Comey, who had "full power of the attorney general." The regulations were issued by the attorney general, so the AG can override them. Every special counsel appointment has been irregular in one way or another. Special counsels are supposed to investigate crimes, but communicating with Russians isn't a crime. That didn't slow Mueller down. Unlike Comey, Rosenstien did not the have the full power of the AG. He got around the regulation by appointing Mueller as a "special assistant." PeterKa (talk) 02:06, 7 December 2020 (EST)

Attention Hong Kong burglers: Carrie Lam's house is full of cash

Hong Kong is a major banking center, but the banks are too afraid of U.S. sanctions to let Chief Executive Carrie Lam open an account: "Hong Kong's leader is being paid in cash due to US sanctions. Carrie Lam earns $56,000 a month and says money is piling up at her house." PeterKa (talk) 02:19, 7 December 2020 (EST)

Attempted murder of election fraud witness

On the main page, there is a headline on the "In the News" column that claims to link to an article with a video of an apparent attempted murder of an election fraud witness. However, on that very same article, an editor's note claims that it is not an attempted hit on a fraud witness. I think this headline should be removed from the main page as soon as possible, to ensure that Conservapedia maintains its credibility. --Toby Chester (talk) 06:17, 9 December 2020 (EST)

History of Conservapedia

I was looking at the Alexa ranking and statistics on this site and as I noticed the 'similar sites by audience overlap' statistic. I thought to myself, "I wonder if there are other good conservative sites out there," thinking that this would lead me to them. I was mistaken for one. When I saw 'Rationalwiki.org', I thought it would be another good conservative site like this one, hence 'rational', but it's swarming with liberals. I was a little annoyed at first, but some of their content funny, just because it's so wrong. As I was browsing the site, I came upon Conservapedia's article. Evidently, they have an extensive network of (mis)information about this site. If the liberals are going to write our history, I think the admins should create a page on this site detailing the history of Conservapedia from a conservative point of view. -Mark Adams(Discuss with me) 10:33, 18 January 2021 (EST)

RfC

I propose we establish a Conservapedia Project page for dispute resolution and editors to air their grievances against other editors, rather than clog up Andy's talk page. I propose we call it Conservapedia:Kangeroo Court, unless somebody has a better name. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 21:32, 31 January 2021 (EST)

Hmm, good idea. After all, then Andy won't have to deal with notifications about users posting on his talk page on arguments he appears to take no interest in involving himself in. —LT^{May D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well!} Monday, 12:25, 1 February 2021 (EST)

If Andy wants to get involved in one of these peeing contests, there's nothing stopping him. This would encourage users to resolvd problems among themselves. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 14:15, 1 February 2021 (EST)

I think we should just stick to keeping Conservapedia simple. Having dispute resolution pages can end up being a mess, like it is on Wikipedia. Bytemsbu (talk) 21:05, 1 February 2021 (EST)

Every dispute doesn't' have to be resolved. The idea now is simply to keep trolls off Andy's talk page and give editors a place to air grievances, which may or may not be legit. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 21:17, 1 February 2021 (EST)

You're starting again with the false accusations, Rob. You should've left well enough alone when Karajou removed this section and took that for the signal he was sending you, but now you're making like the proverbial "dog with a bone" that just won't drop it and let it go (especially now with your attempts to appeal to other editors here). Northwest (talk) 21:27, 1 February 2021 (EST)

You're only continuing to prove my point (and Karajou's point) every time you do this, Rob. Ever since you decided to go rogue and bend a knee to the Biden regime with that post on my talk page falsely accusing me of "trolling" while leaving a link to that DHS note (which appears to have been the moment that you snapped), you've been getting progressively worse. The only reason you put that warning template up to hide what I have to say is because you don't like what I have to say, and only liberals resort to that kind of censorship for similar such reasons - and every time you do this, you only further prove that point. Northwest (talk) 21:46, 1 February 2021 (EST)

The Kangaroo Court will reduce the incidence of divisive flame wars, giving aggrieved parties a place to vent their spleens differences. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 00:08, 2 February 2021 (EST)

No one is going to post on a forum with a title like the one proposed. This page is as good a place as any for the "Why is RobSmith so mean?" discussion. PeterKa (talk) 00:28, 2 February 2021 (EST)

The objective is to establish a process where editors know they will be heard. Right now, Andy's talk page is the first and last resort for complaints and disputes. Some (probably if not most) are too trivial to deal with, which Andy doesn't have time to deal with. This leaves some editors frustrated for not getting resolution to their problems.

A Kangaroo court will give all editors a chance to present their case with evidence before objective viewers. The viewers can then reject it without merit, or possibly render a decision one or both parties. The decision of course is without any enforcement mechanism, and blocking editors can cite as a second offense if the user doesn't mend their ways. Andy of course would be the Final Court of Appeal, but only after the Kangaroo Court rendered a decision.

Sysops would be the only group of editors with direct access to making a complaint against a Sysop on Andy's talk page, by-passing the Kangaroo Court, and eliminating the frivolous cases we've seen in the past. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 01:04, 2 February 2021 (EST)

I'd like to let this drop and move on, but RobS is clearly unwilling to and he's letting it affect both his judgement and his ability to do his job. Northwest (talk) 00:45, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Nothing wrong with this "Kangaroo Court" idea. Except the name, and that name would be a deal-killer. I don't like to copy names from other projects. But maybe "Board of Arbitration" would fit better.--TerryH^Talk 08:06, 2 February 2021 (EST)

Or "Consultative Assembly" or anything would do. There just ought to be a process where people know they will be heard, no matter how valid or ridiculous a complaint might be, rather than chaos, helplessness, and frustration some users now feel. I just want to get the ball rolling on some ideas to kick around. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 08:55, 2 February 2021 (EST)

I don't think its a bad idea, but is Rob calling for this or is Andy calling for it? It is said that this would clean up Andy's talk page, but I don't see Andy saying that. Do we have enough regular editors to necessitate an Arbitration committee? As noted above by another user, it can get messy over at Wikipedia. What is the problem being solved with this, is there a rash of users being banned who are legitimate users? (not trolls or deviants of some kind) Progressingamerica (talk) 22:53, 2 February 2021 (EST)

• What the heck is this, an “HCM” on Conservapedia? I vote NO! to this, simply because one of the founding principles of our wiki is that it is to be a meritocracy, not a mobocracy like Wikipedia or the Rat-Tard nest. With all due respect, RobS was just recently banned from the Rat-Tard nest, and appears to miss it enough to want to institute a page like their “chicken coop” here. This is not the first of his Ratdiculous suggestions; I recall he once wanted to have a “vandal bin” like they have. The Ratdiculous way of doing things has failed over there, causing the Rats to adopt policies more like Wikipedia’s and even our’s, so why in the world would we want to bring that here? DMorris (talk) 11:55, 3 February 2021 (EST)

As a newbie to Conservapedia, there are references that I do not know. What is the "Ratdiculous" "Rat-Tard nest"? -- --CharlesShirley (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2021 (EST)

It is a reference to a group of trolls and other weird people who run an online forum. All you need to know is that several of them are banned from Conservapedia, at least three of them are indefinitely banned from Wikipedia, and that we do not link to them on this site as it is NSFW/S. DMorris (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2021 (EST)

DMorris, thank you for the background information. -- --CharlesShirley (talk) 12:12, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Can you give the name of the site (assuming of course it isn't RationalWiki)? Just want to have a clear idea since, while I have worked on this site since the early 2010s, this is the first I've ever heard of this site you alluded to. Pokeria1 (talk) 05:56, 5 February 2021 (EST)

It's RW, alright. We just choose to avoid mentioning that name here to avoid giving them undeserved attention. Northwest (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Ah, alright, then. I heard of that site a little while back, but not quite in that context. And if it is true that RobS actually tried to turn this site into another RW, that makes his behavior even MORE shameful, including calling me and Northwest RW trolls despite my at the very least not setting foot onto that site even once (well, okay, I did stumble upon ONE article on there, for KiwiLinks, when trying to hunt down any comments on that site after discovering I was the butt of some jokes there, but I never edited that article, and I certainly never joined, let alone acted on their behalf.). Pokeria1 (talk) 07:03, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Although the name "Kangaroo Court" is not a good name, it would be a good idea to resolve disputes without getting Andy involved if he doesn't need to get involved. In other words, it would lift unnecessary burdens on Andy in terms of his talk page.

I suggest calling the court "Conservapedia Court".

Two definitions of a Kangaroo court are: "1) a mock court in which the principles of law and justice are disregarded or perverted 2) a court characterized by irresponsible, unauthorized, or irregular status or procedures."[7] So this would be a bad name for the court.

If things are not resolved via the "Conservapedia Court", then an appeal can eventually be made to Andy if a Sysop or Sysops fail to resolve the matter. Conservative (talk) 12:08, 3 February 2021 (EST)

Right. It wouldn't have any power to enforce anything, it's just a place where an editor who thinks he has a problem can go and complain about somebody. If the case has merit, other editors can look at the context and make a finding of fact. This would keep the trolls off Andy's page. If it's something he wants to get involved in, he can look at the findings. Right now we just have trolls and whispering campaigns. This is not healthy. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 13:25, 3 February 2021 (EST)

Any dispute should be resolved peacefully, but never through a kangaroo court or anything remotely similar, and certainly not via the intrigues and machinations of a power-mad individual (RobS) who caused this problem in the first place. Karajou (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2021 (EST)

Eulogy

Many eulogies are for people who are still alive. Aristotle called this speaking epideicticly. I don't know what I'm talking about.

All who know me know what a positive person I am, having admired Trump, but I am still learning. In that spirit, allow me to eulogize my favorite same-sex-loving person, Christopher Ciccone.

I was just looking at my 1985 high school yearbook. The four years of classes voted Madonna (Ciccone) "Best female vocalist". Most every girl in those classes was out of my league at the time, so I guess I have to admit they knew more than me about some things. Anyway, it turns out Christopher claimed he designed Madonna's looks. People say her singing wasn't that great despite being the vocalist on a number of good songs, so her looks probably were a significant part of her appeal, and Christopher would deserve a lot of credit for her success.

Christopher became a well-respected interior designer and designed Madonna's beautiful and exquisitely tasteful mansion when she was rich and famous. And when she turned on him, he wrote a book about her that was fair about her trying to improve her sympathy towards her male companions, but still proved she was disloyal to people, said he nearly threw a punch at her pretty-boy newlywed husband for patronizing him and walked out of her life when she wouldn't stop doing to him all the things caused by what people have come to dislike about her. What's not to love about Christopher Ciccone? VargasMilan (talk) Sunday, 07:16, 7 February 2021 (EST)

Commentary on the foregoing

You'll notice I used the word "love" in what could be taken in two different senses. This is a portal for communication among encyclopedia writers, so I think the writers who profess such ability should be able to handle this much ambiguity. If they think otherwise, I might mention it would be just as much their fault as mine for not seeing that as something upon which to be remarked.

People can use the word "love" in numerous ways and end in ambiguity and indeed contradiction. If you pay attention, you'll realize in one sense "love" can be Divine, in another ungodly. In one sense: fruits of the spirit (Isaiah 11)!; in another: sterility. VargasMilan (talk) Friday, 06:18, 12 February 2021 (EST)

Main page news

Hello everybody there are important news I want share on main page. how can I introduce news? --Alex Kosh (talk) 21:15, 16 February 2021 (EST)

You can put it on User_talk:Aschlafly or User_talk:TerryH. At least in theory, Talk:Main_Page is the page for this purpose. PeterKa (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2021 (EST)

Photo upload

Hello, I want to know how I can upload photo file here? --Alex Kosh (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2021 (EST)

Hi, you can post specific requests here: Conservapedia:Image upload requests (CP:IUR).

Ideally, please find images which are either in the public domain, or under Creative Commons licenses. If you need any assistance, have questions, or need ideas on where to look, let me know. --DavidB4 ^(TALK) 21:51, 10 March 2021 (EST)

New Project Started

Hello Conservapedia editors! Yesterday I started Conservapedia:Project Current Events and I just wanted to invite anyone that wants to help out on the Project. The idea is similar to Wikipedia’s “Current Event WikiProject”, which I am the lead coordinator of, so hopefully Conservapedia can stay up to date on major current events. One such event that Wikipedia is barely talking about is 45 Office, which Donald Trump created yesterday. Because of my status on Wikipedia, I know a lot of the behind the scenes things, so hopefully I can grow Conservapedia just as much as I did Wikipedia. Feel free to join the Project. --Elijahandskip (talk) 12:17, 30 March 2021 (EDT)

Discussion for a possible new Wikipedia Article

Should a new article be started for discussions on Wikipedia that have major effects? (An example of one is Elijahandskip#Biden–Ukraine conspiracy theory article). Or, should the discussion details be added to Wikipedia or Examples of Bias in Wikipedia. I don't really know if they should go in the examples of bias article, because some aren't really a "bias" per say, but have extreme lasting effects on Wikipedia. Also, if you think a new article, what would the articles title be? --Elijahandskip (talk) 18:07, 14 May 2021 (EDT)

My recommendation would be to create the page on WP's Ukraine conspiracy theory article if you have enough to make it not a just stub, and put a link to it from the Bias in WP portal to it. RobS^{Free Kyle!} 18:13, 14 May 2021 (EDT)

Well I wasn't just thinking about that discussion in general. I have been a part of tons of 'major' discussion on Wikipedia. One also involved Wikipedia removing information about US Governor Impeachment efforts (Both Republican and Democratic governor impeachment efforts). I also participated and know the history of a discussion where Wikipedia was about to say the assassination of an Italian Diplomat was no notable for Wikipedia. I would be perfectly fine creating an article just for that discussion, but what about the other discussions that had controversy on Wikipedia? --Elijahandskip (talk) 18:17, 14 May 2021 (EDT)