Debate:Should there be a separate section on the main page for blogs, advertisements and other non-news items?

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DonnyC (Talk | contribs) at 21:55, 7 May 2013. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search
! THIS IS A DEBATE PAGE, NOT AN ARTICLE. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of Conservapedia.
Your opinion is welcome! Please remember to sign your comments on this page, and refrain from editing other user's contributions.
New Users: Please read our "Editing etiquette" before posting

Frequently items are posted to the "In the News" section of the Main Page which, while they may be interesting and informative, do not fit the clearly stated purpose of this section. This occurrence has led to a significant amount of friction which has then erupted into an increasing number of arguments on Talk:Main Page and elsewhere. As a proposed solution to this, I put the following question to the users of this site:

Does the Conservapedia Main Page need to be redesigned in order to include a separate "In the Blogs" or "Around the Web" section where non-news items can be posted?


Many other pages around the web successfully display what is going on in many different areas of the Internet but are generally quite careful to keep the straight news separate from the blogs and clearly label each. This not only adds to the professional appearance of the site's main page, but is also the most responsible way to go as clearly separates hard news from blogs which may contain any imaginable blend of facts and personal opinion. Fnarrow 01:51, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

Yes. There are many things happening all over the internet that may be interesting, entertaining, or informative, but do not fit neatly into the definition of "news". And there's no reason that space to highlight such items cannot be made on the main page. --DonnyC 02:06, 2 May 2013 (EDT)


The site is what it is. Of course there are going to be a lot of articles and blogs referring to the decline of evolution, homosexuality and atheism because that is what the site is about. No need to change a part of the site (perhaps the only) that functions exactly as is intended. Note that it is not intended that everyone who edits at CP, or even its administrators (or owner!) will agree with everything that is posted there, but it is to generate interest and discussion on topical points. --DamianJohn 05:32, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

Blogs, advertisements and other non-news items should not be included on the main page. Similarly, one blog should not be shamelessly promoted under the pretext of being "current news items." The main page should feature content from within CP, not other blogs. Wschact 05:42, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

It's supposed to be an encyclopedia. The main problem with the main page content is that it's a collection of fringe opinion where it is not blatantly false. An encyclopedia should at the very least attempt to publish only established facts and defensible opinion. --TonySidaway 22:37, 6 May 2013 (EDT)

Regardless of my opinion on the above question, these are other Main Page changes which I would like to see happen (Please include a DETAILED description of your proposed changes)

The main page contributions should to reflect the full range of editors who work together to make this site run. As of the last 500 edits, 7 users make all of the contributions to the MPR news sections with 92.6% being made by only 3. While there is a section on the main talk page for suggesting news stories, it seems to be little known and even less used. This has led to frustration/confusion among editors (See here) and even a very well respected and experienced SYSOP in another case (as witnessed here). I don't know whether the rotating committee, a more visible "suggestion box" or something else entirely is the best option for getting a wider array of important stories on the Main Page, but I feel it's clear that something needs to be done. Fnarrow 01:51, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

I have made a proposal to create a three-editor committee for editing the main page. You can comment on it here. Thanks, Wschact 05:44, 2 May 2013 (EDT)

The main page is largely rubbish, including links to some of the most numbingly stupid articles and links to really poorly researched blogs. Doesn't any other editor feel ashamed that science is routinely degraded while silly nonsense from old books is treated as unassailable fact? Enough of the stupid! A detailed plan for improving the main page is not difficult to compose: remove it, it's a disgrace. --TonySidaway 23:38, 7 May 2013 (EDT)

Tony, so I'm guessing you're not on the edge of you're seat waiting to find out exactly how 2013 is going to be a BAD year for Darwinism? --DonnyC 23:55, 7 May 2013 (EDT)