Difference between revisions of "User:Woozle/Conservapedia"
(New page: All of my Conservapedia contributions are here, assuming they don't end up scrubbing any of them out of the database. ==2008-07-03== I p...) |
(some updates, 9/15) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
All of my [[Conservapedia]] contributions are [[conservapedia:Special:Contributions/Woozle|here]], assuming they don't end up scrubbing any of them out of the database. | All of my [[Conservapedia]] contributions are [[conservapedia:Special:Contributions/Woozle|here]], assuming they don't end up scrubbing any of them out of the database. | ||
| + | ==2008-09-15== | ||
| + | Apparently they only keep about 2 months' worth of revision history for talkpages, which conveniently removes evidence of those troublesome censor-reversions... | ||
| + | ==2008-07-09== | ||
| + | I posted a [[conservapedia:Conservapedia talk:Commandments|request]] to list any banned sites and provide a brief explanation of why they are banned. | ||
| + | ==2008-07-04== | ||
| + | Karajou reverted my [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=User_talk:Karajou&oldid=487267 question] about why my other edit was reverted. I'm guessing that "RationalWiki" is an automatic revert, although I don't see that rule spelled out anywhere. (I didn't notice this until 7/9.) | ||
| + | Also posted a note [[conservapedia:Talk:Atheism/archive9|here]] which someone replied to but I didn't see the reply until much later when everything was archived. (Note the interesting comment at the bottom which did ''not'' get deleted...) | ||
==2008-07-03== | ==2008-07-03== | ||
| − | I posted the following on [[conservapedia:Talk:Atheism]] ([ | + | I posted the following on [[conservapedia:Talk:Atheism]] ([http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Atheism&oldid=486830 rev 486830], which seems to be gone as of 2008-09-15): |
: Also, shouldn't the points raised on R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki about this article be addressed? Why do you have links to R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki – and apparently even any ''mention'' of that site – [http://issuepedia.org/Conservapedia/blocks blocked] by your spam filter? --[[User:Woozle|woozle]] 18:34, 3 July 2008 (EDT) | : Also, shouldn't the points raised on R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki about this article be addressed? Why do you have links to R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki – and apparently even any ''mention'' of that site – [http://issuepedia.org/Conservapedia/blocks blocked] by your spam filter? --[[User:Woozle|woozle]] 18:34, 3 July 2008 (EDT) | ||
Latest revision as of 20:09, 15 September 2008
All of my Conservapedia contributions are here, assuming they don't end up scrubbing any of them out of the database.
2008-09-15
Apparently they only keep about 2 months' worth of revision history for talkpages, which conveniently removes evidence of those troublesome censor-reversions...
2008-07-09
I posted a request to list any banned sites and provide a brief explanation of why they are banned.
2008-07-04
Karajou reverted my question about why my other edit was reverted. I'm guessing that "RationalWiki" is an automatic revert, although I don't see that rule spelled out anywhere. (I didn't notice this until 7/9.)
Also posted a note here which someone replied to but I didn't see the reply until much later when everything was archived. (Note the interesting comment at the bottom which did not get deleted...)
2008-07-03
I posted the following on conservapedia:Talk:Atheism (rev 486830, which seems to be gone as of 2008-09-15):
- Also, shouldn't the points raised on R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki about this article be addressed? Why do you have links to R.a.t.i.o.n.a.lWiki – and apparently even any mention of that site – blocked by your spam filter? --woozle 18:34, 3 July 2008 (EDT)
It was reverted by Karajou the next day; I posted a question on Karajou's talkpage asking about the reversion:
- Hi, I was just wondering why you reverted my talkpage edit suggesting a rebuttal to RationalWiki's article on Conservapedia's atheism page. Did I violate a rule or something? Thanks. --woozle 12:24, 4 July 2008 (EDT)"
The wording is awkward, made more so by not being able to link to the RationalWiki article by way of clarification.
2008-06
Some comments on conservapedia:Conservapedia talk:Public Awareness of the Atheism Article and conservapedia:Talk:Atheism.