RationalWiki will be going through an upgrade cycle this weekend. This will cause some down time, details are at the tech blog. As a reminder, we try and add information to the tech blog during any outage, you can always refer to it for details or as a form of communication if the site is down. from Tmtoulouse (Talk), group Site wide (urgent) at 15:23, 18 April 2014 NextPrevious

# Talk:Main Page/Archive23

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This is an archive page, last updated 4 May 2010. Please do not make edits to this page.
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <13>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <24>, <25>, (back)

## Contents

I like this.. who's idea was it? CPWebmaster 01:07, 1 February 2009 (EST)

Subject, you sentence lacks one. - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 01:09, 1 February 2009 (EST)
I is subject. He lacks a direct object in a form other than pronoun. DickTurpis 01:14, 1 February 2009 (EST)
What is Recaptcha? - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 01:17, 1 February 2009 (EST)
The intended subject was recaptcha. Recaptcha is that thing that makes you type words to make an account. As a matter of fact, I liked it so much I just added it to CP. CPWebmaster 01:19, 1 February 2009 (EST)
Okay. How does that affect the Main page? - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 01:25, 1 February 2009 (EST)
It affects EVERYTHING! 67.242.66.251 02:01, 1 February 2009 (EST)
And: adding Recaptcha totally BORKED the site, did it? Har de har!!!!!

##  Sockpuppet

I notice a number of people putting "sockpuppet" or "vandal" notices on otherwise virgin user pages. As this has the effect of de-redding the special pages entries and rendering them less noticeable, I believe that it is counter-productive and would suggest that the practice be discontinued.  (Toast) and marmalade 14:47, 2 February 2009 (EST)

I suggest to vaporize any examples of such.--Ipatrol 10:34, 17 February 2009 (EST)

(EC) Is the Main Page talk now literally just for talk about the Main Page itself? €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 20:13, 3 February 2009 (EST) Well tech problems go to tech support, what is happening in the world can go to WIGO world and just random prattling can be taken to the saloon. I suppose mainpage and major announcements go here. - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 20:15, 3 February 2009 (EST) The main page talk should be about talk about the wiki- which tech support can fall under. It can go either place. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor'is a puerile idiot' 20:16, 3 February 2009 (EST) No it is for discussing the main page and other major things not what ever random idea pops into your head today. - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 20:18, 3 February 2009 (EST) And the wiki crashing is random how? And weasel, it was gone for at least 45 minutes. And this is the second time its happened. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor'is a puerile idiot' 20:21, 3 February 2009 (EST) Trent is aware of the problem and is going to fix it. Now run along and find something else to do. - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 20:25, 3 February 2009 (EST) From a practical standpoint, CUR, posts on tech support will probably be seen by Trent before they would on other pages. This is more to make Trent's life easier than anything. CorryYou can always tell a Milford man. 20:34, 3 February 2009 (EST) (unident) As said above: I didn't see the tech support desk. Leave me alone. Rusty-spotted catspeed. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor'is a puerile idiot' 20:35, 3 February 2009 (EST) No need to take offense, I'm just describing the rationale. CorryYou can always tell a Milford man. 20:41, 3 February 2009 (EST) ##  Anti-Intellectualism Does anyone else think that an article about anti-intellectualism would be welcome, rather than the redirect to George W. Bush that's in place now? Given that this is the sort of thing RationalWiki was made to oppose, I think an article about it makes sense. --Anonymous Most definitely. We should also have an extensive see also section: George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, ASchlafly, Karajou, TK, etc. etc. --"ConservapediaSubwayResistor'is a puerile idiot' 21:13, 3 February 2009 (EST) ##  Login Warning Perhaps some sort of warning on the main page telling users to log in before they post would be wise? Remember - Big Brother Teacake is watching you! EddyP 14:20, 4 February 2009 (EST) Beware of TK. Wahahahahah! -User:TK/sig Edit this page. That's the warning above the edit box when you're not logged in. -- Nx talk 14:43, 4 February 2009 (EST) Yup, no one would ever "usefully" hit "edit" while looking at the main page. The warning should be where Nx suggests, but try not to make it too CP-centric, since it will mean nothing to those who don't care about CP but like to play on RW. ħuman 14:52, 4 February 2009 (EST) What do I do if I made some anon edits before I decided to get an account here? Can I have those anon addresses changed to my user account name? Just in case I ever decide to get a CP account, of course, and they come looking here for my IP. - Cuckoo 12:45, 13 February 2009 (EST) ##  New Meta-category(gories?) This discussion was moved to Saloon bar. ##  Antivax bombshell Moved to Saloon Bar. Come have a drink. ##  Thread that's actually about the main page shock There's something about the random featured articles that's been bugging me for a while. I don't like the way it cuts off in mid-article at a random point (with one it cuts off during a section title and looks really scrappy). What I propose is that for every cover story, a template featuring a precis of the article appears here, with a link to the main article. I'm quite happy to do the grunt work of all this. What say you? Totnesmartin 15:37, 13 February 2009 (EST) Sure, sounds good. Right now it just grabs the first "x" (I think it's 800) characters, and we noinclude templates and images - although those characters still get counted. One way around this that would keep things "dynamic" (ie, if article improves, so does "snippet") would be to drop the character thing and transclude the entire article - but to put "includeonly" tags around the appropriate chunk of text. What do you think of that? The tags could go in first, so it wouldn't break the main page while we were doing it. ħuman 17:04, 13 February 2009 (EST) Sounds good to me. €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 17:13, 13 February 2009 (EST)
that would be easier. Each article has a general intro, and we just transclude that to the main page. Let's do it that way then. I might have to use my bot account to fiddle with some things if that's ok with everyone. Totnesmartin 17:24, 13 February 2009 (EST)

I've increased the grab from 750 to 1000 characters - it looks OK on my steam 800x600 monitor, but I won't be doing any more tonight, my connection is being a twat again. I'll pick this up in the morning. Totnesmartin 17:47, 13 February 2009 (EST)

Ok, what are these "includeonly" tags? <includeonly> shows up in the text, so it isn't that. I'll try noincludes around the non-intro text. Totnesmartin 06:50, 15 February 2009 (EST)
And using noinclude tags doesn't work either the <noinclude> tag shows on the manin page as does the text within in. I'm tempted to go back to the template idea. Totnesmartin 07:04, 15 February 2009 (EST)
It's the opposite of noinclude, everything enclosed in includeonly will only appear when the template is included, not on the template page. For example: Template:User VoteHope uses includeonly to cat the user page, but not the template page. -- Nx talk 07:10, 15 February 2009 (EST)
And what, precisely, do I have to type? Totnesmartin 07:46, 15 February 2009 (EST)
It doesn't seem to work, I've tried noinclude. Includeonly would hide the text from the article itself and it wouldn't prevent the rest from showing on the main page, so it's useless. I'm looking for a different solution. It's possible to only include the lead section, but some articles, for example Behe:The Edge of Evolution, Interview, don't have one. -- Nx talk 07:54, 15 February 2009 (EST)
I'll go with the templates idea then. Totnesmartin 08:00, 15 February 2009 (EST)
I've got an idea. Give me a few minutes to test it. -- Nx talk 08:03, 15 February 2009 (EST)
Fire away - I've got distracted by my Smash Hits book again... Totnesmartin 08:11, 15 February 2009 (EST)
Ok, here's how it goes: you create a new section at the end of the cover story article called cover. Write the stuff that should appear on the main page under that, and only that section will be included. Then includeonly the cover section so it doesn't appear in the article itself. See User:Nx/sandbox and User:Nx/sandbox2. Although if you're going to do this, it might be a better idea to simply write a lead section for those articles that don't have one. -- Nx talk 08:15, 15 February 2009 (EST)
Even better: For articles that have a lead section, simply add <includeonly>==cover==</includeonly> directly above the lead. the lead section will be included. For articles that don't, add <includeonly>==cover== stuff that should appear on main page </includeonly> directly above the first section. See User:Nx/sandbox, User:Nx/sandbox2 and User:Nx/sandbox3 -- Nx talk 08:38, 15 February 2009 (EST)
Argh, you guys are right, I forgot how includeonly works again. Surely there is a tag that will do what we want??? It would be nice to keep this simple... ħuman 17:28, 15 February 2009 (EST)
yes, I'm thoroughly confused by the whole thing now. Totnesmartin 17:42, 15 February 2009 (EST)
I'm gonna study up on it and apply my eighth grade graduate brain to it! ħuman 17:52, 15 February 2009 (EST)

As I thought, it looks like onlyinclude is what we want to use. It's the "missing" version of inclusion control I imagined surely existed. ħuman 17:55, 15 February 2009 (EST)

• onlyinclude. The markup <onlyinclude>...</onlyinclude> indicates that only text surrounded by "onlyinclude" markup should be transcluded onto another page. This is the most subtle of the partial transclusion tags because it often overrules the others. If there is at least one pair of "onlyinclude" tags on a page, then whenever this page is transcluded, it is only the material within the "onlyinclude" tags which gets transcluded. There can be several such sections, and within each such section, some material might be further excluded by "noinclude" tags, and might also be surrounded by "includeonly" tags so that it does not appear on the original page itself. But material outside the "onlyinclude" tags will be ignored when the page is transcluded onto another page. This can be useful, for example, to repeat a small part of one page on a second one: just surround the small part by onlyinclude tags, and transclude it onto the second page.
Onlyinclude does transclude the intro - but it makes the intro invisible in the actual article. Sod it, I'm going with the templates. Aylesburymartin (making a rare appearance) 08:36, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

Quote: "The percentage of people in the country who accept the idea of evolution has declined from 45 in 1985 to 40 in 2005. Meanwhile the fraction of Americans unsure about evolution has soared from 7 per cent in 1985 to 21 per cent last year." To me, ignoring the fact that the time periods are slightly different, this means that most of the increase in undecideds have come from those who were previously rejecting evolution. In other words the percent rejecting evolution has declined from 48 in 1985 to 39 in 2005. (sorry I meant to put this on the WIGO page)

I'm sure we've discussed this survey before, perhaps in a Ken context. Totnesmartin 14:18, 16 February 2009 (EST)

May I add cascading protection to the main page?--Ipatrol 10:56, 17 February 2009 (EST)

Yes, but only during nighttime hours. Neveruse513 13:56, 18 February 2009 (EST)

##  Random featured article redux

How do you like this? (ctrl-r required because I had to add something to Common.css) --  Nx/talk  18:50, 8 March 2009 (EDT)

I love it. Btw, ctrl-r was not required. --Acionyx 18:52, 8 March 2009 (EDT)
That's great. Totnesmartin 10:19, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
That is pretty cool, the fade doesn't cover the whole article on the version of Mozilla I'm stuck using at the moment, I'll check it again on another machine later. ArmondikoVtheist 12:55, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
There are some technical problems which I don't have the time to sort out now, so consider this a mockup. Some of the cover story articles bork it too. --  Nx/talk  13:09, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
I dunno, it's a cool "exploit" but I think it looks a bit odd. ħuman 18:57, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

##  Straw poll

Here's a lickle ickle straw poll on the new main page proposals above. Stick yer name where yer opinion lies, ladies! Totnesmartin 14:37, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

### Featured picture

Should we have a Featured picture on the main page?
Yes please and marmite (hoo's pickin' 'em?)

Nate River says he'll do it, but there should be a debate process a la cover story nominations. Totnesmartin

--Acionyx 14:49, 9 March 2009 (EDT) (Go business cat!)

• yeah Mei 19:17, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

No thanks

• I'm not too sure about this, it would break the page layout, as one half would become significantly longer, and the entire page would also become much longer. Then there's the question of which pictures we want to show and why. --  Nx/talk  14:58, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
LOLcats, CP screenshots, and fossils perhaps? --Acionyx 14:59, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
LOLcats: we are trying to be half-serious, no? CP screenshots: pointless mostly, since you wouldn't be able to read the text and RW is trying to move away from CP; fossils: ?? --  Nx/talk  15:06, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
Evolution. Maybe good wildlife pics (maybe)? Like the anole? Or the crab? Or that other anole pic on my user page? --Acionyx 15:09, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against — "Featured picture" sections only work on websites with substantial collections of pictures to work with, which hardly describes us. Conservapedia's featured images are all old paintings, and therefore in the public domain; Uncyclopedia's featured images depend on a small but dedicated community of photoshoppers (meaning all of their images are original, or at least altered enough to be fair use); and Wikipedia uses images taken, released into the public domain, and then uploaded by their massive editor base. Please note that any featured image system we could come up with would be nothing like these, thus raising serious fair use questions. (That is to say, while most of our images fall under fair use, within the context of the articles they are shown in, stripped of that context and flaunted on the front page just because we want to put an image up would make us little better than Conservapedia when it comes to copyright law.) Furthermore, is there an actual reason to have a featured image? I can maybe see such a feature added, if (1) the pictures were all immediately relevant to our mission goals, and (2) we had enough of them. I don't see either coming about easily for the time being, so I remain opposed to implementing such a feature. Radioactive Misanthrope 17:21, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against - RA pretty much covered my reasons and then some. ħuman 18:59, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against. Unless we make an effort to put together pictures that make sense, no... Sterilewalkie-talkie 20:01, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against. Despite all the picture we have non would be mainpage material. Also the mainpage nearly fits on one screen, which is nice, unlike WP and CP were you have to scroll down to so 60%+ of it. - User $\scriptstyle\sqrt{12}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}(-3)^{-n}(2n+1)^{-1}$ 20:37, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Yes, I always did like that about our main page. The Main Page is what we present to outsiders—no need to load it down with unnecessary material; keep it short and sweet. Radioactive Misanthrope 20:48, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against. DogP 17:36, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

### New articles

Should we trumpet selected new articles on the main page?
Yes

No and marmite (Cover story covers it)

• ħuman (as at Toast, also, "new" articles, no matter how good they are, usually need work to be cover stories)
• not neededMei 19:18, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against —per Huw above. Radioactive Misanthrope 20:22, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Against DogP 17:38, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Indifferent

• How long do you keep a new article thingy up there? Nah... Sterilewalkie-talkie 20:01, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

### Nx's fade-effect on cover stories

I Like it

• --Acionyx 14:49, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• Totnesmartin 15:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT) iz teh sufficiently advanced technology magic.
• Mei 19:19, 9 March 2009 (EDT)

I Don't like it and marmite (Sorry, Nx)

• Against - it really "adds" nothing. Let's try getting that "onlyinclude" thing working that I mentioned way up above first, to actively select exactly what gets quoted from the coverstories. ħuman 19:00, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
How about my suggestion up there, with the lead section or if there's no lead section, the section named "cover" being included? --  Nx/talk  19:08, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
I see no reason why we can't just use onlyinclude and pick exactly how much text we want from each article... ħuman 19:53, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
Do you want to use onlyinclude with the dpl character limit, or rely solely on onlyinclude? The advantage of my method is that it works on most articles without modifications, since it uses the lead section. --  Nx/talk  07:53, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

It doesn't work on my computer

• I see nothing fading.--Bobbing up 14:51, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
not installed yet — Unsigned, by: ConservapediaUndergroundResistor / talk / contribs
This point is kinda moot, since it's done in a stupid way which won't work with all browsers. I'll try to do it in a more elegant way, however dpl is borking for some of the articles and leaving off closing tags, messing up the whole page. If you have Firefox 3 or Opera 9.5, it should work. If it doesn't, try ctrl-r. --  Nx/talk  15:02, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
Works for me. --Acionyx 15:03, 9 March 2009 (EDT)
• AgainstDogP 17:38, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

Hey! I ordered a cheeseburger!

##  WP Plagiarism!

Ive just found a half-assed website that ｃａｌｌｓ　ｉｔｓｅｌｆ　ａｎ　ｅｎｃｙｃｌｏｐｅｄｉａ - all of its articles are plagiarised![1] -- 忍者  N I N J A A A H ! ! ! ! ! 17:35, 26 March 2009 (EDT) [{{subst:Unsigned|Ninja}} (this makes no sense - ħuman)]

It links to and acknowledges Wikipedia and the GFDL at the bottom of each article. AFAIK that is compliant. Taytopacket 14:24, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
meh. There's a ton of WP mirror sites on the innerwebzez. Totnesmartin 15:47, 26 March 2009 (EDT)
There's a lot of "fan-wikis" that basically say that the easiest way to expand is to copy and paste from WP because they're under the same liscence. It makes sense, but only if in the process they get rid of all the "in universe" style stuff from WP in the process. ArmondikoVtheist 14:34, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

##  WIGO WND?

Should we make a special WIGo category for WND since we made one for aSK? Also, should we add the 4th Reich WIGO to the template, or are we not even bothering with neo-nazis anymore? ENorman 17:33, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

RE: 4r, I think we decided to nuke it for two reasons - one, nothing is GO there, and two, having anything high profile linking to anything like MP was turning a lot of stomachs. As far as WIGO WND, is it turning up a lot on WIGO clogs or world? It would be easy to build, all we need to do is edit DeanS' CP borken news down to just WND items... they'll do all the work for us! I guess really we could have as many WIGOs as we want, but let's be careful of dilution (I could see ASK ending up in clogs if it gets boring), and not do high profile links if they aren't very active. ħuman 18:50, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

##  A little help.....

I was wanting to add WIGO aSK here but its a little outta my league. Someone wanna help? Something like "catch up with all the scientific ineptitude at_____". Ace McWickedRevolt 02:18, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Okay, I clearly dropped off the radar for a week too long, WTF is aSK? ...okay nevermind. I did the obvious thing and put it into search. ArmondikoVtheist 14:31, 31 March 2009 (EDT)
We're waiting a little bit (a couple more weeks?) to see if it has "legs". It will eventually go in the AotW main template, that's where that section of the mainpage is stored. ħuman 19:01, 31 March 2009 (EDT)
Looking at something other than CP could be interesting. ArmondikoVtheist 08:17, 1 April 2009 (EDT)
Trouble is, right now it's dying on the vine. All hopes that PJR will do some recruiting and the results will be delightfully fruitful! ħuman 22:39, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

##  red floaty text thing

Do not want. Totnesmartin 06:12, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

What is? ħuman 22:40, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

##  Ed Rogers Neighborhood

Discusion moved to RationalWiki talk:What is going on in the clogosphere?#Ed Rogers Neighborhood

##  Awful Popes?

A friend sent me this article by Zack Parsons, detailing the six worst popes to ever ascend to lead the Church.

Now that I think about it, the condom flap isn't that bad. [/sarcasm] == CodyH 18:54, 23 April 2009 (EDT)

##  Fundies say the darndest things

Could someone add this http://www.fstdt.com/fundies/top100.aspx?archive=1 to rationalwiki, top 100 of fundamendal quotes: one denying suns existance and so on...great stuff

"If you mean that men have ever been animals you are 100 percent wrong. No evidence under the sun can prove that I was ever my pet cat. ET can happen within a species but not between species."

I'm reasonably sure a lot of those are parody. Just something about the way they're said looks fake. Totnesmartin 17:28, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Bugler has at least one, as does my most valuable sock of ETrundel. So there's probably quite a few parodist statements. EddyP 17:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

thats the saddest thing, they really said that, ive seen those in few pages and theres citations, RIP rationality

##  It's no more than they deserve - Caution! Contains goats!

It's one of those rare moments when I think that there just might be a god![2] — Unsigned, by: Mick McT / talk / contribs

##  Two years on...

This amazing discussion has been moved to the bar down the road

##  Fun and Recipes

Should the link "Fun" and the link "Recipes" on the main page goes to namespaces instead of "Page starting with"? (it was fixed in the Category page) Thieh 14:08, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks --  Nx/talk  14:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

##  Quote generator as one of the cover templates?

Should we have a place on the front page to put perhaps a combined quote generator, a grand combination of Kenquote, Assquote and Swabquote? Thieh 00:01, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

{{template:cpquote}} is up. Thieh 00:10, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't think so. What purpose would it serve other than to make a mess? ħuman 01:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Way too in joke for the main page. - π 01:39, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
I agree with the irrational number. Sterilewalkie-talkie 01:49, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

##  buttons

Hey, paste these into your this and you'll get more buttons. I just had to write in a ref by hand )= Tarantallegra 05:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

1) If you type fast enough, it is quicker to type it by hand than stopping to click a button. 2) Look below the edit screen, it is down in the markup box. - π 05:34, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
You can also put it here to get the same effect -- Nx / talk 05:41, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah... I'll do that. But it would be nicer just to have it. When are you going to get a WYSIWYG editor? Tarantallegra 05:43, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
WYSIWYG is for wimps. Now excuses me I some texing to do. - π 05:45, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
We have WikEd which is almost WYSIWYG. Look in the gadgets tab of preferences -- Nx / talk 05:47, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Okay, well you're going to get that a lot since wikia went to it (; I help out on several wikis, and I happen to know it would take you about 10 min to annoy the hell out of all the non-wimps. But I understand if you don't want to do it, 'cause it's sooo horrid to see that little editor link looking at you round that bathroom door when you're just trying to edit some source in peace. Nice template sig.... cool. Tarantallegra 05:55, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
WikEd is nice and I keep it on (albeit disabled by default) for search and replace mainly, but the loading time can be horrible, and it can screw up the code, especially when you copypaste. All the other WYSIWYG editors I know of are mediawiki extensions and experimental/beta, so I don't want to mess with that. -- Nx / talk 06:14, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, FCK is not really completely worked out, but I guess if wikia is using it then it can't be too terrible. It's getting pretty good except it ruins comoplex code and you can't easily edit inside of templates on the page. I can see where you'd not want to bother. Tarantallegra 08:01, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

##  What is going on?

Right now all I am seeing is "there is no text on this page." MIP has actually signed in - 00:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Restoring lost edit. All better now. ħuman 04:15, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Heh, I tried to reply just as TMT locked the Database. This message brought to you by: respondand honey 04:20, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

##  GFDL to CC-BY-SA

GFDL and CC-by-sa 3.0

Hi! The community here should be aware that Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects have voted to switch licenses to Creative Commons-Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 from the GFDL. This is possible because contributions are licensed under "GFDL 1.2 or later versions", and the GFDL 1.3 has a provision to allow wiki projects to switch to Creative Commons. However, according to the terms of the GFDL 1.3, switching licenses is only possible if done before August 1, 2009.

Because Wikipedia is changing licenses, it will no longer be possible to move content to and from Wikipedia (without violating the licenses) unless this project also changes over to CC-by-sa. I don't know whether that is a possibility, since it appears that your content is GFDL 1.2 only, not "GFDL 1.2 or later versions" like on Wikipedia. However, you might have some wiggle room since all your links to the license just point to the current GFDL at gnu.org, which is now version 1.3. In any case, your community should be aware that if it doesn't switch to CC-by-sa, importing Wikipedia content will not be legal

Thank you for the information, we are currently discussing the switch on site at Debate:Should RationalWiki switch to CC-BY-SA 3.0?. I think the language that it would be illegal to use Wikipedia content is a bit strong. CC-BY-SA provides for licensing under "similar licenses." tmtoulouse 23:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
True. I guess what I meant was that Wikipedia would not be able to use your content if it was only GFDL — Unsigned, by: 161.184.204.26 / talk / contribs
There's a bit of a difference between those two statements, isn't there? I doubt they'd actually want to use our content at WP anyway. Anyway, the only thing I copy from wikipedia are commas. Lots of them. ħuman 03:32, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

##  Jeeves Mark 2 AKA coward

Jeeves has basically been waiting on the sideline for months to have a legitimate reason to throw me in the vandal bin. Jeeves - Go fuck yourself you PRICK. MarcusCicero (talk) 20:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I think even you would agree you're usually just an asshole, not a vandal, so I'm not sure what you think he was waiting for because your recent behavior seems new-ish to me. So did Jeeves get a legit collar or not? You know you're likely to get out of the vandal bin as soon as whatever has you acting out the last few days passes. User:Nutty Roux/sigtalk 20:05, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
If he has a "legitimate reason" to throw you in the bin, then what's the problem? --Kels (talk) 20:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
If you don't want to be in the vandal bin, than quit trolling and do something useful. Do this at least once in a while, and then maybe you'll have a reason to complain. Otherwise, shut up.The Goonie 1 (talk) 20:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, well. I'm sure your buddies at your secret laughing at RW forum, and your girlfriend who goes to another school will comfort you in your hour of need. --JeevesMkII The gentleman's gentleman at the other site 20:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't rise to it dude, this is what they all want. The bad thing with the vandal bin reducing the rate that people can edit at, is that it means they have to think very carefully about how much annoying, offensive and provoking shit they can cram into just one edit. theist 20:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
That's a bad thing? One of the big problems with MC is that he's boring. A few single edits that focus on quality would be a big improvement, even if they're quality insults --Kels (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

(new section left by MC's brother (?) moved to user talk:MarcusCicero)

Wow. ħuman 23:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

##  Grow up and get jobs

Some of these anti-intellectual vandals and trolls were having some fun at your expense, Richard. If you've gotten wind of it, or hear of it at some point, pay it no mind. Mainly just a group of malcontented trolls who frequent several sites, and of course the usual gang of young teen vandals all too common to the Internet. --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:28, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

thanks--yes they do get under my skin  :) RJJensen 21:30, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Just an excerpt from Richard Jensen's talk page. You people are fools and little kiddies with nothing better to do with your time and your lives. Grow the fuck up and stop harassing another website for no fucking reason (other than your perceived intellectual superiority). Or else spend your time on 4Chan. Because you people are completely pathetic. You are vandals and fucking trolls who need to get girlfriends and who need to get a fucking life. MarcusCicero (talk) 15:17, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Normally I wouldn't feed the troll, but what the hell? It's the weekend and I'm up early... So MC, tell us, do you take an aggressive posture online to cover your own real life insecurities? OR are you just a prick? SirChuckBCall the FBI 15:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
No, I have a job and a life. I'm a prick when it comes to dealing with people who in my opinion barely deserve to be called human beings MarcusCicero (talk) 15:28, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Beat me too it, SirChuck. I have to laugh at how he chuggs down TK's coolaid and assumes that everything bad that happens on CP (that isn't caused by Andy or TK, of course) comes from us. Hopefully, MC also vents his spleen on EBaumsworld, 4chan (although I doubt he gets past the /y/ channel), ED, UC, etc., etc. and every other site out there that points at his beloved "encyclopaedia" and laughs. --PsyGremlinWhut? 15:34, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
I dunno, even though it's the weekend, I still wouldn't feed the troll. Trolls are obnoxious.The Goonie 1 (talk) 15:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Just to sum up, MC feels that we complain too much on the internets, and his solution is to complain on the internets. Z3rotalk 15:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Go figure. Gotta love hypocrisyThe Goonie 1 (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
So MC, you have a job, and a life. Yet every three weeks or so your surface around here to bitch and moan..... Maybe your boss should give you more to do..... By the way, you're so brave that when someone responded to your posting, you tried to burn it... Way to take a stand on your convictions... You really are a sad little man MC, a sad little man. SirChuckBCall the FBI 15:51, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I'd love to have a job right now, but the way the economy here is right at the moment, hardly anyone's hiring temps over the summer so I've had no luck. Seriously, the market for temporary clerical work is total crap right now. As far as growing up, I'm going to school to learn how to make cartoons and draw comic books for a living. Growing up is not really a required job skill. --Kels (talk) 16:01, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

As far as getting jobs goes (for me), I probably have a cooler job than Marcus Cicero does. In fact, I guarantee that he wishes he got to do/see some of the cool things I get to with my (low level) security clearance. As far as growing up, I don't wanna grow up, I'm a Toys-R-Us kid!!!!The Goonie 1 (talk) 16:06, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Hmmm, interestingly, I have a job (a pretty damn good one) and a girlfriend/fiancee. I've never vandalised Conservapedia (I will admit to one or two accounts that added some wierd stuff, but it was stuff that they by and large agreed with). I assume it wasn't addressed to me, then. Never mind. But still, seriously, why do these people blame Rational Wiki when the actual majority of real "trolls and vandals" (as opposed to those who were just out to challenge Andy and Co.'s more bizarre beliefs and therefore labelled as such) operate out of 4Chan, Encyclopaedia Dramatica and Uncyclopedia and more where they genuinely are little kids with nothing better to do. theist 16:39, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

...

 This conversation is about to go badly downhill, inevitably ending in comparisons to Hitler,and hurt feelings all around. Stop now. Step away from the keyboard. Go pet a jerboa, or milk a goat.

FlareTalk 16:47, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Flare, would you piss off with posting these everywhere? It's getting annoying. --Kels (talk) 17:18, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Yup, knock it off NF, please. This message brought to you by: respondand honey 17:27, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Especially since this arguement was over and done with and MC was gone when that was put up.The Goonie 1 (talk) 17:29, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 This conversation is about to go badly downhill, inevitably ending in comparisons to Hitler,and hurt feelings all around. Stop now. Step away from the keyboard. Go pet a jerboa, or milk a goat.

HAHAHA!!! That was pretty funny Z3ro!The Goonie 1 (talk) 17:32, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I try. Z3rotalk 17:35, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, alright, no more template, but stop giving me reasons to use it. FlareTalk 17:36, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Who needs stopsigns when humor will suffice?!The Goonie 1 (talk) 17:38, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Who needs stopsigns WHEN THE CONVERSATION HAS GONE OFF ONTO SOMETHING NON-CONTROVERSIAL? Seriously Flare, did you read beyond the first comment? --Kels (talk) 17:42, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

When the Nazis came for the communists, I remained silent; I was not a communist.

Then they locked up the social democrats, I remained silent; I was not a social democrat.

Then they came for the trade unionists, I did not protest; I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, I did not speak out; I was not a Jew.

When they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.— Unsigned, by: MarcusCicero / talk / contribs

Can we please end this whole stopsign arguement? Otherwise, it might create the need for one, and that would be self-defeating, wouldn't it?The Goonie 1 (talk) 17:46, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Can we have a template that basically says "SHTOP! This Flame War isn't ready yet! Where are the accusations of being a Nazi? Where is the uncensored F-word? Why are you acutally being civil?" (okay, so if you haven't seen the advert, it will be lost on you). theist 19:25, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
This really doesn't belong on the main page... Perhaps we should move this to the bar where we can continue over drinks. SirChuckBCall the FBI 20:56, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Aye. At what point? Just the quote-astic bit below or cut it from futher up? theist 21:03, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
You know, hitler thought the same exact way. Web (talk) 21:12, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

### Convienient edit for the nonsense section

Did Somebody Say Penguin? You're Welcome

OH OH OH, Now that we've made MC looks stupid are we just dropping random out of context quotations? I'll go next, I'll go next:
 “”It was a pleasant café, warm and clean and friendly, and I hung up my old waterproof on the coat rack to dry and put my worn and weathered felt hat on the rack above the bench and ordered a café au lait. The waiter brought it and I took out a notebook from the pocket of the coat and a pencil and started to write. . —Ernest Hemingway
SirChuckBCall the FBI 20:21, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

My turn! Here's a favourite:

 “”...I really didn't understand what he meant by 'anatomy.' So Ralph handed me an anatomy book and when I went home that night I had decided to learn anatomy. I started with page one and copied the entire book–everything, in one night, from the skeleton up. I came back the next day like a dumb kid and said, "Thank you very much, I just learned my anatomy ... —Frank Frazetta
--Kels (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
 “”We've had game-shows based on bingo, game-shows based on roulette and we've had game-shows based on 'The Wicker Man' but never, have we had a game-show based on the Copenhagen Interpretation of quantum mechanics... until now. —Charlie Brooker describing Deal or No Deal

I think this is about as irrelevant as you can get.... perhaps. Penguin. theist 20:30, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

I think I can go one better.

 “”There's an old phrase that goes something like this: "Let's talk turkey." I don't know what it means, but if it means getting down underneath it all back to where it began and outlining the underlying thematic/post-thematic accentuations re: Nietzschean subversive transgression in terms of pre-theorized transgressive subversion, then let's not do that. Instead, I'd like to discuss the whole concept of "speedy punk rock." —Mark Prindle
The electrocutioner (talk) 22:17, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

##  Protecting my brother from ridicule

I just want to protect my brother from ridicule. Please help me remove these troublesome edits. After I remove these main page talk edits I will disappear. MarcusCicero (talk) 21:52, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

You're free to leave, but you won't be removing any talk page edits. Just wait a few days and they'll be automagically archived anyway... ħuman 23:29, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Another last post? ГенгисYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 23:37, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

##  Sorry :(

The events of the last couple of days were bizarre, even by my standards. What do I have to do to loose the troublesome classification of 'troll'? — Unsigned, by: MarcusCicero / talk / contribs

I'm not sure that's possible--I'm tempted to do it myself (as you haven't threatened to ass-rape anyone like Fall Down nor are you CUR-like in your behaviour), but it would seem as though consensus is against that course of action. Most of what you did/said was on talk pages, and was obnoxious, sure, but so what? The mob seems to have decided to keep you binned for now, and while there may be arguments that that is unfair, it seems to be the way things will stay for the next little while--even though it means we're treating you worse than we treat TK. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 14:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Except we are not, TK isn't binned because he is not actively editing the cite. TK was blocked permanently for the kind of trolling MC did. Hell, I 404 blocked TK from even accessing the site. Take a break from the wiki MC, that is your best bet, at least for a few days. tmtoulouse 14:17, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
And, when you return, try not adding posts which say that you're masturbating over other editors - really. Silver Sloth (talk) 14:22, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I have no problem in taking a long break - if you look at my editing patter I'm only ever active for a few days at a time before disappearing - but I don't want the vandal bin hanging over me whatever time I decide to wander back. And I also dislike being labelled a troll. I'm somewhat troublesome, but surely you need someone to point out the holes in your ego?

And you have got to admit - you people calling anyone a troll considering your WIGO entries is priceless irony and hypocrisy. MarcusCicero (talk) 15:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

##  Protection

It has been protected again, can someone undo it? - π 22:10, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Done. ħuman 22:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

##  Stupid use of site messages is stupid.

I get that the RationalWiki social scene has always been rough and tumble, but why are users now being abused over the intercom? Don't spread the bickering as far and as wide as possible. IMHO.

Anyways, and why is it visible to unregistered users? I was not logged in and saw it. There are at least a few articles around that try to be serious, and such a message is shooting RW in the foot. Icewedge (talk) 07:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, one more place for this shit to take place! - π 07:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
It's visible to anons because the site-wide urgent group is designed that way. A bureaucrat can hide it. -- Nx / talk 09:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I just did, incidentally. theist 09:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Wow, cool, how did you do that? ħuman 21:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
It's all on the Intercom page. theist 14:20, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
It is? All I see are the last 50 messages... maybe I'm not looking carefully enough. Or maybe I'm not a 'crat? S'possible, I haven't tried to do any 'cratting chores lately... ħuman 22:56, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
There's a "mark as read for anonymous users" link on Special:Intercom for messages sent to the urgent group. I think the link disappears once you hide them. -- Nx / talk 07:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Ah, of course, doh and thanks! ħuman 21:56, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

##  Conservapedia has a page on Vicipaedia

[3] In case anyone here is interested. --70.29.37.90 (talk) 22:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

First TVTropes, now this... Totnesmartin (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

##  Just noticed ...

...('cause I don't look @ the Main Page often) ... whoever did the layout did a good job - I love how the two columns are the same height at whatever width you move the page. CP could learn from that. I have just eaten & stiltontalk 16:15, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

##  Haiti Earthquake

Please, please feel free to improve the rather rushed addition. And feel free to remove it in due course. Bob Soles (talk) 17:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

##  my sysopship

where's my sysopship, dudes? YourEnemy? (talk) 02:51, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

How about you do something and we might care enough to give you one. - π 02:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

##  Invisible wiki

Rational wiki pages #never# appear in the first batch of a webspider search. — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs

And? Totnesmartin (talk) 18:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh, no, now no one will ever find this place! Thank you, unsigned numbers, we'll close RationalWiki immediately. (Thankfully, Ken's idea of legitimacy only works for nutters, not for rational people) --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Spam. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Spam backwards is mapS. --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
It's also an anagram for ampS. 18:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Good work. Keep 'em coming. — Sincerely, Neveruse / Talk / Block 18:10, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Rationally RW is perceived as irrelevant - however much you ham it up. And spam backwards is mɒqs. — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs

Who cares? And please sign your posts, like this: ~~~~ €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 18:19, 2 February 2010 (UTC) "perceived as irrelevant" is an anagram of "real deviancies pervert" --Irrational Atheist (talk) 18:22, 2 February 2010 (UTC) Where is the redirect to Anagramwiki? — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs Beware the Earwigs that eat Irrelevant Articles. — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs BON's claim isn't even true... ħuman 19:30, 8 February 2010 (UTC) The point is not to describe the situation but to change it. There is a spectre haunting Wikiland - and it is not Rationalwiki. What is BON? — Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.7 / talk / contribs Bunchanumbers - somebody who hasn't signed in, like you. Or me for short. Bondurant (talk) 17:04, 10 February 2010 (UTC) Or this. Totnesmartin (talk) 18:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC) Why not allow continued reworkings of Marx's aphorisms? — Unsigned, by: 212.85.6.26 / talk / contribs This wiki should be made more useful than a sonic screwdriver in an anechoic chamber. — Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.3 / talk / contribs Still almost invisible (one entry, a number of pages down): and many articles seem to have had the sentences linking them to RW's premises to debunk 'theories mad, bad, weird, incorrigibly stupid or just plain sky-clad quirky' removed/allowed to go down the plughole. — Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.70 / talk / contribs 17:26, 10 March 2010 (UTC) Sorry, but why do you think that this should be of interest to us? 17:45, 10 March 2010 (UTC) ContribsTalk The definition of what RW #should# be? Or that RW articles appear to have no connection to the mission statement?. Or is it the intent that nobody else look in the RW fishbowl? 212.85.6.26 (talk) 16:24, 11 March 2010 (UTC) ##  Article of the weak The Earwigs of Indifference want a new one. — Unsigned, by: 82.44.143.26 / talk / contribs They still want a new one. As do the Ants of the Apocalypse. ##  Sophia likes you, unless you have potato blight. — Unsigned, by: [[User:|User:]] / [[User talk:|talk]] / contribs Cool. Is she pretty? €₳$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 19:22, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Sophia is the subject of many worshipful haiku. Sophia is also the name of the tuber mascot of the Uncyclopedia.— Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.5 / talk / contribs

Rationalwiki:

Difficult haiku

Somewhat irrelevant— Unsigned, by: 82.44.143.26 / talk / contribs

What about Mary Sue? (look her up on the web). — Unsigned, by: 212.85.17.10 / talk / contribs 13:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

##  Funny interaction at Conservapedia

This discussion has been moved to Conservapedia_Talk:What_is_going_on_at_CP?#Some_everyday_shit_at_Conservapedia 23:17, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

##  What Rational Wiki needs

Is more surrealism and irony.

Beware brainwormholes. — Unsigned, by: 82.44.143.26 / talk / contribs 15:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Unblock TehKlown , the ironic surrealist! Alain (talk) 20:49, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

##  Homeopathy and Conservapedia

How could the principles of homeopathy ('like cures like') be used on Conservapedia? (This is semi-humorous) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC) 82.44.143.26 (talk) 14:19, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

##  What happened to Trent's ability to restore view counts?

He's done it once or twice before. Radioactive Misanthrope 21:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Dunno. He's not been onsite for the last couple of weeks or so. €₳\$£ΘĪÐMethinks it is a Weasel 21:36, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Months? Years? ħuman 03:38, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
He's probably on a beach somewhere with Colin. Šţěŗĭļė skull 15:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)