History Wiki / RationalWiki

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.
28th Dec '16 12:04:36 AM Fireblood
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** 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 "Left of reason" category either, see OnlySaneMan for details).

to:

** 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).
18th Dec '16 5:18:17 PM Jhonny
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. Of course banned users [[NeverMyFault like to see ideology as the reason of the banning]] rather than tone or behavior. RW has quite a few users that openly flaunt the consensus on some topics and have never had major problems.

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. Of course banned users [[NeverMyFault like RW used to see ideology as the reason of the banning]] be rather than tone or behavior. RW has quite a few lenient in allowing users that openly flaunt the consensus on some topics and have never had major problems.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.
18th Dec '16 5:14:54 PM Jhonny
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

* UnPerson: While the wiki traditionally had very lenient ban rules, negative experience with trolls as well as the fact that next to everybody is given sysop rights (which includes banning any given user) and changes in the userbase have led to some users being banned and new users being banned for so much as resemblance to any banned user. This is particularly the case for any "Avenger-socks" so named after one user banned for their opinion on Israel.
13th Dec '16 10:10:10 AM N1KF
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* AccentuateTheNegative: Many articles on personalities and websites. The Reddit article, for instance, mainly cites subreddits known for their right-wing ideology, provocativeness or stupidity.

to:

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



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



* InsufferableGenius: Like TVT, RW encourages humor in their articles, and, like TVT, the comedic talents of their contributors vary wildly. Given that RW is usually censorious[[note]]Part of its mission statement is, after all, the ''refutation'' of crankery, worship, and propaganda.[[/note]], sometimes their articles cross the border between "witty" and "smug".

to:

* InsufferableGenius: Like TVT, Wiki/TVTropes, RW encourages humor in their articles, and, like TVT, the comedic talents of their contributors vary wildly. Given that RW is usually censorious[[note]]Part of its mission statement is, after all, the ''refutation'' of crankery, worship, and propaganda.[[/note]], sometimes their articles cross the border between "witty" and "smug".



* NewMediaAreEvil: The wiki doesn't seem to like [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Web_2.0 Web 2.0]] on the explanation that it's making people less smart.



* ScienceIsBad: Completely inverted, as one of the site's goals is to refute pseudoscience and people who really think ScienceIsBad. Indeed, many of the articles defend the advances of science against people who dismiss or outright deny them, from [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Global_warming_denialism global warning denialists]] to [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anti-vaccination_movement anti-vaxxers]].

to:

* ScienceIsBad: Completely inverted, as one of the site's goals is to refute pseudoscience and people who really think ScienceIsBad.Science Is Bad. Indeed, many of the articles defend the advances of science against people who dismiss or outright deny them, from [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Global_warming_denialism global warning denialists]] to [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Anti-vaccination_movement anti-vaxxers]].



* SlidingScaleOfSillinessVersusSeriousness: In between Wikipedia and TV Tropes. Articles tend to vary from serious to silly. However, regardless of the silliness or seriousness of a specific article, unless it's in the separate 'Fun' or 'Essay' sections of the site accuracy is non-negotiable (at least in theory).

to:

* SlidingScaleOfSillinessVersusSeriousness: In between Wikipedia Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} and TV Tropes.Wiki/TVTropes. Articles tend to vary from serious to silly. However, regardless of the silliness or seriousness of a specific article, unless it's in the separate 'Fun' or 'Essay' sections of the site accuracy is non-negotiable (at least in theory).



* TVTropesWillRuinYourLife: Their now-deleted article Conservapedia:Boycott listed visiting TV Tropes as an alternative to reading Conservapedia and laughing at it. They added the comment "Kiss your spare time good-bye."

to:

* TVTropesWillRuinYourLife: Their now-deleted article Conservapedia:Boycott listed visiting TV Tropes Wiki/TVTropes as an alternative to reading Conservapedia and laughing at it. They added the comment "Kiss your spare time good-bye."



* ZeroApprovalGambit: The supposed ''modus operandi'' of [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deep_cover_liberal deep cover liberals]].

to:

* ZeroApprovalGambit: The supposed ''modus operandi'' of [[http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Deep_cover_liberal deep cover liberals]].liberals]].
----
29th Nov '16 11:42:46 AM golgi
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* CursedWithAwesome: If you've been around long enough (a few weeks or days) and are generally thought to be trusworthy, you will be demoted to janitor (i.e. sysop). (Frivolous block wars are common, and encouraged; fortunately, in addition to non-serious block reasons (such as one that outright says "block war") there are options to make said blocks last only a few seconds, which help differentiate them from serious blocks.) If you anger the gods sufficiently, you may even be further demoted to the lowly, despicable position of bureaucrat.

to:

* CursedWithAwesome: If you've been around long enough (a few weeks or days) and are generally thought to be trusworthy, trustworthy, you will be demoted to janitor (i.e. sysop). (Frivolous block wars are common, and encouraged; fortunately, in addition to non-serious block reasons (such as one that outright says "block war") there are options to make said blocks last only a few seconds, which help differentiate them from serious blocks.) If you anger the gods sufficiently, you may even be further demoted to the lowly, despicable position of bureaucrat.
This list shows the last 10 events of 183. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Wiki.RationalWiki