Conservapedia talk:Burning the Evidence

Shout out to PZ Myers - Can I read this somewhere?!
I am intrigued.

Random comment
This is a random comment, inserted in to a talk page. -- 15:15, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * This is a reply to that random comment which attempts to derail serious conversation with the insertion of sophomoric humour, or perhaps a reference to memes. Omnomnomnom cocks. TheoryOfPractice (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh heh. Touché. -- 15:18, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm just here for the food. LordSlug All Heil Me! 04:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 * And I'm Backin' Up, 'cos my Daddy taught me good.  DogP (talk) 07:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

An Automated Means of Uncovering Oversighted Articles?
I imagine work has already began, but if not - there is a relatively simple (conceptually, but the code would be a b!tch) way for someone with the appropriate skills to uncover oversights. One would need to create a bot (or many, really) that performs binary comparison on each diff of each article, systematically. More realistically, a tool could be created that compares every diff of a single article. This would reveal, as far as I can see, any additional, un-logged edits that occurred between the 'old' and 'new' version of the article. Has anyone started (or completed!) development on a tool of this nature?

Talkpage entries are also deleted on Wikipedia
true story.

Sometimes the edit history is taken with it. 24.85.161.72 (talk) 23:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Why is the article showing up right aligned?
After a certain point in the Richard Dawkins discussion, all the paragraphs are flush right and ragged left. Can someone fix this? User:BootmiiUser talk:Bootmii(Nomic) 05:06, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Appears to be intentional (see 'align="right"' in div). No idea why. It does make for an uncomfortable read. Scream!! (talk) 11:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)