YMMV / Rational Wiki

  • Acceptable Targets: Pretty much anyone who encourages fundamentalism and pseudoscience. Conservapedia and its management are the biggest targets on the site.
  • Anvilicious:
    • Averted, mostly. Even the articles on religion seem to at least respect it as long as it isn't raging fundamentalism, though to some it comes across as having a condescending tone.
    • Incredibly blatant on any page about atheism which they have plenty of and one of the articles they regard as the most important is an FAQ for newly deconverted atheists
    • Articles on the subject of feminism tend to be strongly in support of the movement, and very visibly so. Similarly, the wiki is staunchly anti-MRA. Please refrain from discussing whether or not they are correct in doing so.
    • Averted with their article on radical feminism, which is full of criticism about the movement. This is fairly recent though since Rational Wiki was largely sceptical of gender essentialism in the past and tended to sway in favour of radical feminist ideologies as evidenced through the article's edit history. Now they fully support transgender concepts (such as gender identity) and other liberal feminist views; the idea of gender identity, however, is distinct from the idea of gender essentialism, and does not require it.
    • The wiki is also strongly pro-vegetarianism, to the extent of including a very hefty essay explicitly oriented to defend its moral bases. Interestingly, veganism, on the other hand, is much less represented on the page.
  • Appeal to Flattery: The title of the site, as to some it seems to insinuate that the site itself is always rational and that being associated with or supporting the site speaks well of the person who accepts does.
  • Broken Base
    • Rational Wiki's growing fondness for liberal feminism and disdain for radical feminism. This has created a divide between Rational Wiki's radical and liberal feminists, especially since radical feminism was fairly tolerated on Rational Wiki before.
    • And then you have the people who feel that favoring any ideology over another contradicts the idea of being rational.
    • Naturally on the Arab-Israeli Conflict - now mostly resolved in favor of one side with most of the other either banned or inactive. Do not read their article on Hamas or Israel if you are a supporter of Israel.
    • Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton both have fans on the site and said fans often don't see eye to eye.
  • Crosses the Line Twice: "Indigo child" is not to be confused with "In dingo child", which is "what your child might become if you misplace it in Australia."
  • Franchise Original Sin: Due in part to having been created in response to another blatantly political website with diametrically opposing views (Conservapedia), the site has always been politicized, with notably a clear feminist slant (though the more general line was unclear and depended heavily on individual editors). It got only increasing as new controversies arose within the atheist/secular movement.
  • Growing the Beard: The site started out as just a mocking opposite of Conservapedia, made to be as deliberately obnoxious and overly left-wing as possible. However once it moved on from its obsession with Conservapedia and gained a more well-researched, Deadpan Snarker tone, the site became much more enjoyable and helpful.