History Wiki / RationalWiki

8th Jul '17 9:25:45 AM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users who get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.

to:

* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki [[Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users who get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.
4th Jul '17 6:01:03 PM WaterBlap
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** They've treated people like WebVideo/Thunderf00t and The Amazing Atheist very critically, due to both's views on UsefulNotes/{{Feminism}}, and the former's views on UsefulNotes/{{Islam}}.

to:

** They've treated people like WebVideo/Thunderf00t and The Amazing Atheist WebVideo/TheAmazingAtheist very critically, due to both's his views on UsefulNotes/{{Feminism}}, and the former's views on UsefulNotes/{{Islam}}.UsefulNotes/{{Feminism}}.
3rd Jul '17 9:09:09 AM BrendanRizzo
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** Their tag for blatant sarcasm is "Do You Believe That?" Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron's original ''Way of the Master'' video begins with Cameron giving a gross misrepresentation of the Big Bang theory, and Comfort then exclaiming, [[SarcasmMode "Do you believe that?"]]
23rd May '17 1:42:41 AM ergeis
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ChuckNorrisFacts: {{Subverted}}. Their [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris article on the man]] includes a few claims in the style of the meme, but instead of making him look badass, they make him look pathetic, mostly focusing on his well-known hostility to the subject of same-sex marriage. In fact, [=RationalWiki=] is probably the one of the few places on the whole Internet where Norris ''isn't'' treated as a MemeticBadass.[[note]]The other being Encyclopedia Dramatica, [[DiscreditedMeme who used to like them]][[/note]] Most of this is prompted by Norris' support for creationism, promoting bible study in public schools, homophobia, and other almost stereotypically religious conservative positions.

to:

* ChuckNorrisFacts: {{Subverted}}. Their [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris article on the man]] includes a few claims in the style of the meme, but instead of making him look badass, they make him look pathetic, mostly focusing on his well-known hostility to the subject of same-sex marriage. In fact, [=RationalWiki=] is probably the one of the few places on the whole Internet where Norris ''isn't'' treated as a MemeticBadass.[[note]]The other being Encyclopedia Dramatica, [[DiscreditedMeme who used to like them]][[/note]] him]][[/note]] Most of this is prompted by Norris' support for creationism, promoting bible study in public schools, homophobia, and other almost stereotypically religious conservative positions.
23rd May '17 1:38:38 AM ergeis
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ChuckNorrisFacts: {{Subverted}}. Their [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris article on the man]] includes a few claims in the style of the meme, but instead of making him look badass, they make him look pathetic, mostly focusing on his well-known hostility to the subject of same-sex marriage. In fact, [=RationalWiki=] is probably the only place on the whole Internet where Norris ''isn't'' treated as a MemeticBadass. Most of this is prompted by Norris' support for creationism, promoting bible study in public schools, homophobia, and other almost stereotypically religious conservative positions.

to:

* ChuckNorrisFacts: {{Subverted}}. Their [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Chuck_Norris article on the man]] includes a few claims in the style of the meme, but instead of making him look badass, they make him look pathetic, mostly focusing on his well-known hostility to the subject of same-sex marriage. In fact, [=RationalWiki=] is probably the only place one of the few places on the whole Internet where Norris ''isn't'' treated as a MemeticBadass. MemeticBadass.[[note]]The other being Encyclopedia Dramatica, [[DiscreditedMeme who used to like them]][[/note]] Most of this is prompted by Norris' support for creationism, promoting bible study in public schools, homophobia, and other almost stereotypically religious conservative positions.
26th Mar '17 9:49:20 AM nombretomado
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny: They don't even try to be subtle, with NorthKorea called the [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/North_Korea "Democratic People's Republic of Bullshit"]] and [[UsefulNotes/ThatSouthEastAsianCountry crossing through every reference of "Burma"]] from the [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burma Union of Myanmar]].

to:

* PeoplesRepublicOfTyranny: They don't even try to be subtle, with NorthKorea UsefulNotes/NorthKorea called the [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/North_Korea "Democratic People's Republic of Bullshit"]] and [[UsefulNotes/ThatSouthEastAsianCountry crossing through every reference of "Burma"]] from the [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Burma Union of Myanmar]].
9th Mar '17 3:03:07 PM MarkLungo
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* AccentuateTheNegative: Many articles on personalities and websites. The Website/{{Reddit}} article, for instance, mainly cites sub reddits known for their race-supremacism and ultranationalism, provocativeness, or stupidity.

to:

* AccentuateTheNegative: Many articles on personalities and websites. The Website/{{Reddit}} article, for instance, mainly cites sub reddits known for their race-supremacism bigotry and ultranationalism, provocativeness, or stupidity.



* ArchEnemy: Conservapedia is portrayed as this (the site was created as its opposite), though it's obvious that Rational Wiki views them as a loud annoyance more than anything. The site's articles on Conservapedia and Schlafly's antics often read like the history of the Soviet Union under Stalin.

to:

* ArchEnemy: Conservapedia is portrayed as this (the site was created as its opposite), though it's obvious that Rational Wiki views them as more of a loud annoyance more than anything. The site's articles on Conservapedia and Schlafly's antics often read like the history of the Soviet Union under Stalin.UsefulNotes/JosefStalin.
9th Mar '17 11:00:02 AM MAI742
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* AccentuateTheNegative: Many articles on personalities and websites. The Website/{{Reddit}} article, for instance, mainly cites sub reddits known for their right-wing ideology, provocativeness or stupidity.

to:

* AccentuateTheNegative: Many articles on personalities and websites. The Website/{{Reddit}} article, for instance, mainly cites sub reddits known for their right-wing ideology, provocativeness race-supremacism and ultranationalism, provocativeness, or stupidity.



** In-Universe, despite the site's general left-wing leanings, their article on Creator/MichaelMoore is rather critical, claiming the only thing that puts him above RushLimbaugh is his support of universal healthcare. Similarly, despite being a heavily atheistic site, they don't find the arguments of Creator/ChristopherHitchens very convincing. (In Hitchens' case, it's partially due to his pro-war position, but his religious positions come under fire as well.)
** They treat left-wing cranks like [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca Globalresearch.ca]] just as harshly as they do right-wingers like WND, although they do perhaps have a numerical bias - likely due to the general leanings of their contributors - towards attacking the right. Even Noam Chomsky is criticized for his "highly questionable statements" regarding genocide at Srebenica, Kosovo, and Rwanda, and his quasi-defense of Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson (they deny the placement of the article about him in the category "Extreme moonbattery" though, though they don't place him in the "Left of reason" category either, see OnlySaneMan for details).

to:

** In-Universe, despite the site's general left-wing leanings, centrist/social-liberal perspective, their article on the democratic socialist Creator/MichaelMoore is rather critical, claiming the only thing that puts him above the nationalist-neoconservative RushLimbaugh is his support of universal healthcare. Similarly, despite being a heavily atheistic site, they don't find the arguments of Creator/ChristopherHitchens very convincing. (In In Hitchens' case, it's partially due to his pro-war position, but his religious positions come under fire as well.)
well.
** They Their stated mission to trash arguments with poor logic and/or use of evidence means that they have written much more material criticising the lies of the USA's powerful - neoliberals and neoconservatives. But they treat left-wing anarchist/populist cranks like [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Globalresearch.ca Globalresearch.ca]] just as harshly as they do right-wingers like WND, although they do perhaps have a numerical bias - likely due to the general leanings of their contributors - towards attacking the right. nationalist-Christian-fundamentalist World Net Daily (WND). Even the anarchist intellectual Noam Chomsky is criticized for his what they consider "highly questionable statements" regarding genocide (it's not a well-defined term, and Chomsky's interpretation is valid but little-used) at Srebenica, Kosovo, and Rwanda, and his quasi-defense defense of Holocaust denier Robert Faurisson Faurisson's human right to free speech (they deny the placement of the article about him in the category "Extreme moonbattery" though, though they don't place him in the "Left of reason" category either, see OnlySaneMan for details).



* OnlySaneMan: The category [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Right_of_reason Right of Reason]] is for conservatives with enough reasonable viewpoints that they can be taken seriously[[note]]Gerald Ford, Robert Taft, Michael Bloomberg, T.Boone Pickens, etc.[[/note]]. The leftist version is called [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Left_of_reason Left of Reason]][[note]]Oscar Wilde, George Orwell, Bernie Sanders, etc.[[/note]].

to:

* OnlySaneMan: The category [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Right_of_reason Right of Reason]] is for conservatives nationalists-conservatives-liberals with enough reasonable viewpoints that they can be taken seriously[[note]]Gerald Ford, Robert Taft, Michael Bloomberg, T.Boone Pickens, etc.[[/note]]. The leftist communist-socialist-anarchist-liberal version is called [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Category:Left_of_reason Left of Reason]][[note]]Oscar Wilde, George Orwell, Bernie Sanders, etc.[[/note]].



** The wiki's origins as an anti-Conservapedia site still tend to show clearly in most articles about right-wing politicians or political positions; they don't pretend to be neutral.
** Even ThisVeryWiki is subject to a little criticism, most notably a rundown of Administrivia/TheSecondGoogleIncident. That said, the article used to be ''much'' more critical than it is now, even after the Incident.

to:

** The wiki's origins as an anti-Conservapedia site still tend to show clearly in most articles about right-wing nationalist or conservative politicians or political positions; reality rarely conforms to the USA's definition of political centrism/'neutrality', so they don't pretend to be neutral.
either.
** Even ThisVeryWiki is subject to a little criticism, most notably a rundown of Administrivia/TheSecondGoogleIncident. That said, the article used to be ''much'' more critical than it is now, even after the Incident.
9th Jan '17 1:14:31 AM MarkLungo
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users that get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.

to:

* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users that who get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.
8th Jan '17 10:02:12 PM ElectroKraken
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users that get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspsiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.

to:

* RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgement: {{Averted}}. True to its name, a rationalist point of view is non-negotiable in the articles, and the site is not above criticizing [[NotableReferencesToTVTropes any other]] [[TheOtherWiki site]] which does have this policy, accusing them of pandering to the LowestCommonDenominator by committing the GoldenMeanFallacy. On the other hand, they aren't above locking pages and banning users that get too troublesome. RW used to be rather lenient in allowing users with opposing political views, but unfortunately it has taken to being quicker with bans against users they politically disagree with. Usually [[SuspsiciouslySpecificDenial [[SuspiciouslySpecificDenial for something totally unrelated]] to their views.
This list shows the last 10 events of 188. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Wiki.RationalWiki