RationalWiki's 2018 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff — we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3383Goal: $5000

Conservapedia:In the media

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Wigocp.svg This Conservapedia-related article is of largely historical interest, and not necessarily the focus of RationalWiki today.
Conservapedia was a major focal point in the early history of RationalWiki, but long ago ceased coming up with new ways to appall and amuse.
Our energies are now spent debunking other, fresher examples of religious fundamentalism and creationist claims.
For RationalWiki's less ancient content, try the cover story articles or a random article.
Conservlogo late april.png
Conservapedia
Introduction
Newcomer's Guide
What is going on?
Commentary
Best of Conservapedia
Blatant plagiarism
Differences with Wikipedia
Hijacked articles
"SDG"
"TZB"
"Fab Five"
Sysops
Timeline
CP in the media
In-depth analysis
Active users
Illustrated guide
Fun
Article Matrix
Greatest Insights
Parthian Shots

More about CP

The latest sightings are at the top. All dates are Common Era unless otherwise noted.

2017[edit]

October 2017[edit]

October 8, 2017: Zing: Everipedia: Bản sao xấu xí và tội lỗi của Wikipedia (translated: Everipedia: The ugly and sinister copy of Wikipedia)

Everipedia không phải trang web duy nhất mong muốn trở thành đối trọng của Wikipedia. Vào năm 2006, Andrew Schlafly, một luật gia và nhà hoạt động Công giáo đã tạo ra trang Conservapedia.
Everipedia is not the only site that aims to become a counterweight to Wikipedia. In 2006, Andrew Schlafly, a lawyer and Catholic activist, created Conservapedia.

October 4, 2017: The Outline: Everipedia is the Wikipedia for being wrong

Everipedia isn’t the first would-be Wikipedia competitor. Andrew Schlafly, the son of conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly, created Conservapedia in 2006 as a counterpoint to what its founders called widespread liberal bias on Wikipedia.

August 2017[edit]

August 9, 2017: Deutschlandfunk Kultur's article Wikipedia-Kopie mit rechter Weltsicht (translated: Wikipedia copy with a right-wing worldview) considers Conservapedia, Metapedia and Infogalactic as alternative, mostly English-language, right-wing versions of Wikipedia. The article quotes blogger and publicist Michael Seemann, who notes that Conservapedia is dissatisfied with how Wikipedia deals with the topic of abortion.

June 2017[edit]

June 27, 2017: L'Expansion: Infogalactic, Metapedia, Conservapedia: l'extrême droite aussi a ses "Wikipédia" (translated: Infogalactic, Metapedia, Conservapedia: the extreme right also has its "Wikipedia").

Parce qu'ils jugeaient Wikipédia peu fiable et contaminé par les "social justice warrior" (comprendre, les progressistes), plusieurs figures de l'extrême droite ont inventé leurs propres encyclopédies en ligne. Leurs noms: Metapedia, Infogalactic, ou encore Conservapedia.
Because they consider Wikipedia to be unreliable and contaminated by "social justice warriors" (i.e. progressives), several extreme right-wing figures have invented their own online encyclopedias. Their names: Metapedia, Infogalactic, and Conservapedia.
Sur les pages d'accueil de Metapedia et Conservapedia, on trouve ainsi deux colonnes relayant des thèses et théories négationnistes, suprémacistes, antisémites, racistes, islamophobes, antiféministes, complotistes, ou encore homophobes.
On the home pages of Metapedia and Conservapedia, there are two columns relaying negationist, supremacist, antisemitic, racist, Islamophobic, anti-feminist, conspiracist, and homophobic theses and theories.
Pour l'heure, ces plateformes restent moins populaires que Wikipedia. Alors que cette dernière est le cinquième site le plus consulté au monde, Infogalactic n'est que le 14 710e, et Conservapedia 18 066e aux États-Unis, selon le classement Alexa. Mais leur trafic ne cesserait d'augmenter, boosté par "révolte anti-Wikipédia."
For the time being, these platforms remain less popular than Wikipedia. While the latter is the fifth most visited site in the world, Infogalactic is only the 14,710th, and Conservapedia the 18,066th in the United States, according to Alexa's ranking. But their traffic would not stop increasing, boosted by an "anti-Wikipedia revolt".

June 21, 2017: Wired's article Welcome to the Wikipedia of the Alt-Right describes Conservapedia as "a version [of Wikipedia] aimed at religious conservatives and created by Andrew Schlafly, son of the conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly" and as "the 18,066th most popular site in the US".

Today, however, an alternate but influential cultural consensus exists in opposition to that of Wikipedia. Conservapedia, for example, has a rundown of the top examples of liberal bias on Wikipedia. “Articles on genocide, murder, and homicide have no mention of abortion,” is a major complaint. Another common gripe is that “Wikipedia changed the Bradley Manning article to Chelsea Manning and gave the article subject female attributes”.

March 2017[edit]

March 28, 2017: Hipertextual: Conservapedia: La ridícula alternativa de Wikipedia realizada por conservadores (translated: Conservapedia: The ridiculous Wikipedia alternative run by conservatives)

March 6, 2017: Westword's article Tom Tancredo on His Team America PAC Being Called a Hate Group mentions Conservapedia's criticism of the Southern Poverty Law Center.

January 2017[edit]

January 23, 2017: Inverse's article How Will Wikipedia Navigate the Trump Era? mentions “Post-truth Politics”. There is a picture of Andrew Schlafly in the article.

A decade ago, conservative activist Andrew Schlafly, son of famed anti-Equal Rights Amendment campaigner Phyllis Schlafly, launched Conservapedia, a site very much intended to “fix it.” Conservapedia was modeled on Wikipedia, but its mission was to present an alternative to what Schlafly perceived to be the original site’s liberal bias. According to Schlafly, traffic to the site grew 50 percent over the course of 2016. He told Inverse that Conservapedia hosted 20 million visits in November (though the source cited for those figures was, inevitably, Conservapedia).

RationalWiki users reflect on the article.

2016[edit]

December 2016[edit]

December 5, 2016: Southern Poverty Law Center: President-elect Donald Trump has tapped U.S. Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) to be the administration’s nominee for director of Health and Human Services mentions Conservapedia.

Andrew Schlafly is also a homeschool advocate and a founder of the website Conservapedia, which has promoted ideas like public schools make homosexuals; atheists tend to be fat, which impedes brain function; liberals don’t think lying is wrong and evolution is racist and fundamental to Nazism and communism, as well as the idea that evolutionists no longer debate creationists because, the site says, creationists tend to win the debates.

December 5, 2016: The Register's article Take that, creationists: Boffins witness birth of new species in the lab links to RationalWiki's article on the Lenski affair:

Lenski demonstrate[d] that over time the bacteria could evolve into a new type that could grow using entirely new food sources. This angered the creationist editor of Conservapedia and led to an exchange of letters with Lenski that resulted in one of the most epic scientific smackdowns in history.

November 2016[edit]

November 29, 2016: Fortune magazine's article What a Map of the Fake-News Ecosystem Says About the Problem describes Conservapedia as one of the "largest hubs" that were found to "propel a lot of the traffic involving fake news". A Chinese version is released a day later on 财富中文网: 假新闻传播路线图:特朗普当选全靠俄罗斯段子手?.

November 27, 2016: Medium: Data is the Real Post-Truth, So Here’s the Truth About Post-#Election2016 Propaganda. Conservapedia's role as "a wiki-informational resource" is mentioned.

November 26, 2016: The Topeka Capital-Journal: America's Conservative Road to Destruction - Our Last Chance

An entire compendium of the right wing, religiously-influenced alternate reality can be found on Conservapedia, the right wing’s answer to Wikipedia. You owe yourself a look. The opposition to this conservative alternate-reality onslaught does not exist. There was no such organization, and no such plan to debunk the new “reality” on a large scale. Nobody was dissecting the right wing media and providing a globally accepted, focused, truth-based voice of opposition.

November 16, 2016: The Forward's article How Steve Bannon and Breitbart News Can Be Pro-Israel — and Anti-Semitic at the Same Time mentions Conservapedia.

Some on the alt-right, the emerging group of racist activists who support Trump, oppose the close U.S.-Israel relationship as part of a broader critique of U.S. interventionism abroad. Yet they admire Israel as a “model for white nationalism and/or Christianism,” according to the right-wing online encyclopedia Conservapedia. Some also see Jewish immigration to Israel as helping their cause of a Jew-free white America.

November 1, 2016: The Conversation's article On HIV, Tiananmen Square and science describes Conservapedia as "a website that not only argues against any link between CO2 and temperature, but also that Einstein’s theory of relativity has never been properly verified".

September 2016[edit]

September 6, 2016: In the article Conservative Phyllis Schlafly cut her own pathway, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that Andrew Schlafly "founded Conservapedia as a conservative alternative to Wikipedia, which he said was too liberal", as well as "compiled news items from conservative Internet sites and sent them to his mother daily".

July 2016[edit]

July 29, 2016: Patheos: The Sheer Audacity of Conservapedia

July 27, 2016: Télérama: Conservapedia, l’Internet parallèle et inquiétant des ultra-conservateurs américains (translated: Conservapedia, the parallel and disturbing Internet of American ultra-conservatives). Ken responds.

June 2016[edit]

June 17, 2016: In the article Trump’s #AskTheGays Misfire Prompts Call for Conservative Twitter, Politicus USA quotes Conservapedia that “Trump seems to be on the side of the homosexual agenda.”

January 2016[edit]

January 15, 2016: Time's article These Are Wikipedia's Top 15 Moments describes Conservapedia as:

But perhaps the most amusing alternative wiki may be Conservapedia, which defines itself as "a conservative, family-friendly Wiki encyclopedia" and whose contributor guidelines are cast as "commandments."

2015[edit]

September 2015[edit]

September 8, 2015: Kyle Kulinski releases a video titled Conservapedia, Stop Embarrassing Yourself on the Secular Talk YouTube channel.

September 2, 2015: Kyle Kulinski releases a video titled Fact Checking Conservapedia's 'Secular Talk' Entry on the Secular Talk YouTube channel.

August 2015[edit]

August 18, 2015: The National Catholic Reporter's article On Conservapedia rewriting the Bible states:

It seems that Andy Schlafly, son of Phyllis Schlafly, is the founder of the web site Conservapedia. One of Conservapedia’s tasks is the rewriting of the Bible, or at least the editing of it. Andy Schlafly and his cohorts are deleting suspect verses and replacing words with a socialist ring to them with close-enough synonyms that recast the meaning to be more in keeping with a capitalist ethos.

2014[edit]

July 2014[edit]

July 31, 2014: Gizmodo's article Conservative Alternatives to the Internet's Most Popular Sites recommends Conservapedia's pages on "Barack Hussein Obama," "Homosexuality," "Worst College Majors," "Evolution Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality," and last but certainly not least, "Liberalism and Beastiality." in particular, noting that "[t]here is a lot about beastiality".

June 2014[edit]

June 3, 2014: Finnish Helsingin Sanomat newspaper: Keskiajan paluu on aiempaa lähempänä (translated: The Return of the Middle Ages is nearer than before) mentions Conservapedia and its denial of the theory of relativity.

April 2014[edit]

April 29, 2014: Houston Press: 5 Most Bizarre Kids Show Entries on Conservapedia

2013[edit]

December 2013[edit]

December 20, 2013: AlterNet's article Right-Wing Group Seeks Help Rewriting the Bible Because It's Not Conservative Enough begins with:

Liberal bias in the media pales in comparison to what you’ll find in your standard-issue Bibles, according to Conservapedia.com, a kind of Wikipedia for the religious right. The King James Bible, not to mention more recent translations like the New International Version (NIV), are veritable primers of progressive agitprop, complains Andy Schlafly, the founder of Conservapedia.com. (His mother, Phyllis, is an activist best known for her opposition to feminism and the Equal Rights Amendment.)

But not to worry. Andy Schlafly’s group is on the case, and they have invited you to pitch in. Well, maybe not you, exactly, but the "best of the public,” whose assistance is solicited in proposing new wording for left-leaning Bible verses.

Don’t know Aramaic, Hebrew or ancient Greek? Not a problem. What they are looking for is not exactly egghead scholarship, but a knack for using words they've read in the Wall Street Journal. They have a list of promising candidates on their website—words like capitalism, work ethic, death penalty, anticompetitive, elitism, productivity, privatize, pro-life—all of which are conspicuously missing from those socialist-inspired Bibles we’ve been reading lately.

June 2013[edit]

June 4, 2013: Sports Kyunghyang: 극우 누리꾼, 해외 사이트에서도 “광주 폭동…” (translated: Right-wing netizens, even overseas sites cover "Gwangju uprising ...")

June 1, 2013: The Telegraph's article Hay Festival 2013: Steve Jones on science and religion mentions Conservapedia and contains a link to The Conservative Bible Project.

April 2013[edit]

April 3, 2013: Le Monde: Des conservateurs américains nient la relativité d’Einstein (translated: US conservatives deny Einstein's relativity)

March 2013[edit]

March 24, 2013: Daily Kos's article Conservapedia Disproves E=mc² discusses Conservapedian relativity.

2012[edit]

December 2012[edit]

December 29, 2012: Swedish IDG.se blog: Conservapedia bjuder på ett och annat gott skratt, eller? (translated: Conservapedia offers an occasional good laugh, right?")

October 2012[edit]

October 5, 2012: Rachel Maddow mentions Conservapedia in the opening segment of The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. Full transcript: "When we are horrified by the real information in the world, and we want to wall ourselves off from it and create a more comforting fake truth for ourselves... in America when we have that impulse it looks like this:" (commentary on Republicans' take on polls) "It was the same dynamic at work when they invented Conservapedia. Remember Conservapedia? If something that you read about the world on Wikipedia makes you uncomfortable as a Conservative, Conservapedia is guaranteed to only contain information that makes you feel OK. So, if you are discomforted by the idea that the human species is the result of millennia of biological evolution, for example, Conservapedia has you covered, don't worry. On Conservapedia not only has evolution been debunked by the obvious fact that humans and dinosaurs coexisted... not only did we coexist, but in fact, according to Conservapedia, dinosaurs are actually still here: dinosaurs have been seen in Papua New Guinea twice since 1990. It says so on Conservapedia. So, if you don't like the real world, invent your own." The video includes an example of Ken's Mainpageleft art.

September 2012[edit]

September 1, 2012: Raw Story's article Phyllis Schlafly calls for Rove resignation over Akin ‘murder’ remarks covers Phyllis Schlafly and Karl Rove in the Todd Akin kerfuffle. Her son is mentioned, and his project is described as "a wildly inaccurate 'conservative alternative' to Wikipedia."

August 2012[edit]

August 10, 2012: The Sydney Morning Herald's article What cars do conservatives buy? has a look at what Conservapedia has to say about various car manufacturers.

August 6, 2012: Houston Press: 10 Funniest Sentences on Conservapedia

March 2012[edit]

March 30, 2012: Mother Jones: Diagnosing the Republican Brain

We all know that many American conservatives have issues with Charles Darwin, and the theory of evolution. But Albert Einstein, and the theory of relativity?

If you’re surprised,allow me to introduce Conservapedia, the right-wing answer to Wikipedia and ground zero for all that is scientifically and factually inaccurate, for political reasons, on the Internet.
Claiming over 285 million page views since its 2006 inception, Conservapedia is the creation of Andrew Schlafly, a lawyer, engineer, homeschooler, and one of six children of Phyllis Schlafly, the anti-feminist and anti-abortion rights activist who successfully battled the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970s. In his mother’s heyday, conservative activists were establishing vast mailing lists and newsletters, and rallying the troops. Her son learned that they also had to marshal “truth” to their side, now achieved not through the mail but the Web. So when Schafly realized that Wikipedia was using BCE (“Before Common Era”) rather than BC (“Before Christ”) to date historical events, he’d had enough. He decided to create his own contrary fact repository, declaring, “It’s impossible for an encyclopedia to be neutral.” Conservapedia definitely isn’t neutral about science. Its 37,000 plus pages of content include items attacking evolution and global warming, wrongly claiming (contrary to psychological consensus) that homosexuality is a choice and tied to mental disorders, and incorrectly asserting (contrary to medical consensus) that abortion causes breast cancer.
The whopper, though, has to be Conservapedia‘s nearly 6,000 word, equation-filled entry on the theory of relativity. It’s accompanied by a long webpage of “counterexamples” to Einstein’s great scientific edifice, which merges insights like E=mc2 (part of the special theory of relativity) with his later account of gravitation (the general theory of relativity).
“Relativity has been met with much resistance in the scientific world,” declares Conservapedia. “To date, a Nobel Prize has never been awarded for Relativity.” The site goes on to catalogue the “political aspects of relativity,” charging that some liberals have “extrapolated the theory” to favor their agendas. That includes President Barack Obama, who (it is claimed) helped published an article applying relativity in the legal sphere while attending Harvard Law School in the late 1980s.

“Virtually no one who is taught and believes Relativity continues to read the Bible, a book that outsells New York Times bestsellers by a hundred-fold,” Conservapedia continues. But even that’s not the site’s most staggering claim. In its list of “counterexamples” to relativity, Conservapedia provides 36 alleged cases, including: “The action-at-a-distance by Jesus, described in John 4:46–54, Matthew 15:28, and Matthew 27:51.”

March 30, 2012: The Georgia Straight: Conservapedia: American conservatives have their own batshit crazy Wikipedia

March 22, 2012: Conservapedia earns a mention in the introduction to Chris Mooney's The Republican Brain, where they are described as "the right-wing answer to Wikipedia and ground zero for all that is scientifically and factually incorrect, for political reasons, on the Internet."

January 2012[edit]

January 30, 2012: Schlafly quoted for comment in New Jersey news article "Secular, liberal 'hippie' NJ parents buck homeschool trend": "The public schools have become a battleground in the contest over values, particularly sexual-related issues, and that’s unfortunate. I think a lot of homeschooling parents, conservative and liberal, would prefer their children not be pawns in these cultural wars."

January 17, 2012: Conservapedia earns a passing, but scathing, comment in Larry Womack's column in the Huffington Post, The Real Problem With Media Today? The Audience. Womack says the following about Conservapedia and Andrew Schlafly: "Even Fox News isn't a safe enough haven for some lunatics on the right side of the aisle. One "Christian" felt so threatened by Wikipedia's arrangement of fact that he had to develop his own Conservapedia. When he eventually realized that the Bible didn't agree with him any more than science, history or the arts, he decided to re-write that, too. I imagine this man does a lot of angry crying. I also imagine that somewhere a teacher is reading a paper that cites a Conservapedia article, sighing and thinking it's just not worth the fight with the parents."

2011[edit]

November 2011[edit]

November 8, 2011: Skeptoid lists Conservapedia as one of the Top 10 Worst Anti-Science sites, who says of it, "If you want to know about dinosaurs, geology, radiometric dating, the solar system, plate tectonics, or pretty much any other natural science, Conservapedia is your Number One resource to get the wrong answer."

October 2011[edit]

October 28, 2011: Conservapedia's articles on counterexamples to relativity, evolution and fat atheists are mentioned in the Huffington Post article Bad Science Leads to Bad Policy, No Matter Your Political Beliefs, which has a very fitting description of Conservapedia: "a kind of Wikipedia for ideologues on the right who want their facts and definitions to line up with their political beliefs".

October 10, 2011: ThinkProgress: It’s Anti-Flat-Earth Day, and Conservapedia Still Thinks the Theory of Relativity Is a Liberal Plot

August 2011[edit]

August 11, 2011: The New Scientist article E=mc2? Not on Conservapedia laments how Conservapedian relativity operates.

Coming from a physicist who authored the book The Physics of Christianity, in which he claims that without Jesus’s resurrection, our universe couldn’t exist, I am forced to question the meaning of “crackpot”. It’s no matter, though, because Tribe’s grasp of general relativity is irrelevant – he was not writing a scientific paper, he was merely creating an analogy. But for Andy Schlafly, founder of Conservapedia and son of anti-abortion activist Phyllis Schlafly, the analogy was apparently enough to turn him off Einstein for good.

June 20, 2011: Penn Jillette releases a video titled Penn Point - Conservapedia or Troll Site? - Penn Point on his YouTube channel pennpoint.

July 2011[edit]

July 10, 2011: The New Jersey Star Ledger publishes a feature titled New Jersey home schooling: The Wild West of education on home schooling in New Jersey and Conservapedia in specific. The article highlights many of the oddities on Conservapedia, as well as Andy Schlafly's bizarre exam questions, whilst hinting that if home schooling were regulated, Schlafly wouldn't get away with this kind of teaching. Conservapedia reacts. On July 12, Conservative columnist George Berkin followed up with a defense of Conservapedia: Public high school group-think.

June 2011[edit]

June 20, 2011: Penn Jillette releases a video response titled Penn Point - Are you a Fat Atheist? - Penn Point on his YouTube channel pennpoint. Predictably, Ken has this to say.

May 2011[edit]

May 8, 2011: The Irish Times's article Thor is a conservative film. comments on Conservapedia's essay on the greatest conservative movies.

As I may have mentioned before, I am a great fan of the eccentric right-wing website Conservapedia. Established by one Andy Schlafly, son to well-known liberal-bashing blowhard Phyllis Schlafly, the site sells itself as a Conservative alternative to the notoriously Trotskyite Wikipedia. As Mr Schlafly sees it, Wikipedia is worryingly in thrall to such pseudosciences as Darwinism and dangerously enamoured by militant “socialists” such as Comrade Barack Obama (who seems to be simultaneously a secret Muslim, an atheist and inclined towards leftist Afro-centric Christian sects). Conservapedia does occasionally move from kicking liberals to bigging-up rare examples of right-wing incursion into the leftist-dominated media. One such case is their attempt to detail great "Conservative Movies".

January 2011[edit]

January 15, 2011: Conservapedia earns a passing mention as the "most amusing alternative wiki" in Time's article on the Top 10 Wikipedia Moments.

January 12, 2011: Wired lampoons Conservapedia's articles on "Atheism and obesity," "Hollywood values" and their list of "examples of bias in Wikipedia" in an article entitled Ten Impressive, Weird And Amazing Facts About Wikipedia. Predictably, Conservapedia sees this coverage as a good thing.

5) US Conservatives believe that Wikipedia has a liberal bias, so they've started up a competing Conservapedia

If you reject the scientific consensus on climate change, aren't keen on gun control or feel safe in the knowledge that the Universe was created by a supernatural being, you might find Wikipedia has somewhat of a liberal bias. No problem. Conservapedia will welcome you with open arms.

Some of Conservapedia's more notable pages include the entry on the link between atheism and obesity, listing a number of prominent overweight atheists including Christopher Hitchins and Kim Jong-il, the entry on "Hollywood values", which are "characterized by decadence, narcissism, rampant drug use, extramarital sex leading to the spread of sexually-transmitted disease, abortion, lawlessness, promotion of the homosexual agenda and death" – and best of all the list of "examples of bias in Wikipedia", which encourages readers to email Jimmy Wales and tell him to sort it out.

January 8, 2011: A parallel online universe by Emma Jane of The Australian describes Conservapedia as "a disturbing parallel universe where the ice age is a theoretical period, intelligent design is empirically testable, and relativity and geology are junk sciences."

2010[edit]

December 2010[edit]

December 6, 2010: The Discovery Institute's Evolution News and Views website describes Andrew Schlafly's foray into L'affaire Lenski as "misguided" in the article Michael Behe’s Quarterly Review of Biology Paper Critiques Richard Lenski’s E. Coli Evolution Experiments.

November 2010[edit]

November 17: In an article entitled From Conservapedia to Brooklyn Rock, The Indypendent mentions Conservapedia's list of "greatest conservative songs." It takes note of the "virtually anything by Toby Keith" comment, having previously labeled him "jingoistic" in the introduction. The article goes on to say "some of its selections are quite a stretch."

November 11: Professor emeritus of physics at the University of Virginia Paul Fishbane writes about Conservapedia's take on the Theory of Relativity, in the Tablet Magazine article Time Warp: On Right-Wing Rejections of Science, which says "Recent right-wing rejections of Einstein’s theory of relativity echo Nazi dismissals of what they called ‘Jewish Physics’".

November 1, 2010: Ms. Magazine quotes Conservapedia's "article" on "Richard Dawkins and the women and minority population" (written by none other than Conservative) as a source in their Will “New Atheism” Make Room For Women?" article. Blag Hag responds with the article Does the media really care where the atheist women are?.

October 2010[edit]

The October 2010 issue of Scientific American's Science Index lists Conservapedia as a complete fallacy (scoring it 0 on a 0 to 100 'fallacy-versus-fact' scale), and describes Conservapedia as "the online encyclopedia run by conservative lawyer Andrew Schlafly, [which] implies that Einstein's theory of relativity is part of a liberal plot."

September 2010[edit]

September 27, 2010: Conservative pundit Rowan Scarborough's article Wikipedia Whacks the Right references Conservapedia in an article decrying Wikipedia's treatment of conservative and liberal election hopefuls. Hilarity ensues as Karajou and Ed Poor take to the comments section, to enforce the impression Conservapedia is run by thugs and bullies. Quote of the day so far: "That's a major difference between Conservapedia and Wikipedia that anyone could see immediately: we will not tolerate a liar on the site."

September 3, 2010: TerryH volunteers to be the head of agitprop, writing a propaganda tract insightful journal article on Andy's American Civics class (and how Conservapedia is growing rapidly!) for The Examiner. He also neglects to mention that he is a sysop on Conservapedia, and forgets to mention that by linking to his blog from Conservapedia, he is using it to earn an income.

August 2010[edit]

August 20, 2010: The Maclean's article A Botox backlash in Hollywood, Alanis Morissette on Alanis Morissette Day, and is Wyclef Jean shafting Haiti’s poor? lists Conservapedia in it's Newsmakers section, saying "The site attempts to answer such vexing questions as, 'Why do non-conservatives exist?'"

August 18, 2010: Discover: Are We Alone: Conservapedia relativity denialism

August 18, 2010: Slate: Are We Alone: Conservapedia relativity denialism

August 17, 2010: Jewish Telegraphic Agency's article It’s all relative: You say Einstein is ‘Jewish science,’ I say ‘liberal conspiracy’ picks up on Conservapedia's "Relativity is liberal conspiracy" nonsense. Schlafly takes a hammering, from statements including "replace ‘liberals’ with ‘Jews’ in [that] sentence,” the words might as well have been written by a Nazi circa 1930s-era Germany" and "Scientists looking at the list [of counter-examples to relativity] say many are irrelevant, some misinterpret the science and many are flat wrong. Additionally, Schlafly did not respond to repeated efforts to interview him for the article.

August 13, 2010: The Young Turks releases a video titled Conservapedia: The Right Hates Science on their YouTube channel.

August 11, 2010: Talking Points Memo: Rachel Maddow: ‘The War On Brains Is Still Being Waged Every Day’ (VIDEO)

Maddow notes that rejecting tenets of science and even history in defense of faith is becoming more and more popular among GOP candidates — and Schlafly’s rejection of physics is just one piece in a much larger puzzle.

August 10, 2010: The Atlantic: E=mc2 Is a Liberal Conspiracy Against Jesus

August 10, 2010: The New York Times's article titled First They Came For The Climate Scientists briefly explains Conservapedian relativity.

Everyone knows that the American right has problems with science that yields conclusions it doesn’t like. Climate science — which says that we face a huge global externality that requires not just government intervention, but coordinated international action (black helicopters!) has been the target of a sustained, and unfortunately largely successful, attempt to damage its credibility.

But it doesn’t stop there. We should not forget that much of the right is deeply hostile to the theory of evolution.

And now there’s a new one (to me, anyway; maybe it’s been out there all along): it turns out that, according to Conservapedia, the theory of relativity is a liberal plot.

August 10, 2010: ThinkProgress: Conservapedia: The theory of relativity is a liberal plot

August 9, 2010: Talking Points Memo: Conservapedia: E=mc2 Is A Liberal Conspiracy

August 3, 2010:In an article entitled Is Wikipedia biased against Israel? in Emunah, Conservapedia gets a passing mention when the author says, "Indeed the bias was pronounced enough to prompt the creation of the conservative wiki called Conservapedia with its article called 'Examples of Bias in Wikipedia'." Bonus points for Karajou turning up in the comments, bleating about how liberals tries to edit his site "and discovered the hard way that we’re not going to put up with their behavior."

March 2010[edit]

March 18, 2010: Huffington Post: Conservative Bible Project Cuts Out Liberal Passages

February 2010[edit]

February 24, 2010: Princeton Alumni Weekly: A moment with ... Andrew Schlafly '81, on 'Conservapedia'

February 17, 2010: A French translation of the Rolling Stone magazine article Obama's Big Sellout on Courrier International, Wall Street continue à faire la loi (English translation on Google), references Conservapedia's article about Barack Obama in a sidebar:

Le portail Conservapedia, le Wikipedia de la droite américaine, explique dans son article consacré à Obama que les banques de Wall Street qui ont bénéficié du plan de sauvetage ont figuré parmi ses meilleurs soutiens pendant la campagne électorale.

In English, according to a local French speaker:

According to Conservapedia, an American right-wing version of Wikipedia, the Wall Street banks which benefited from Obama's bailout were among his strongest supporters during the electoral campaign."

January 2010[edit]

January 9, 2010: In his New York Times article Of Individual Liberty and Cap and Trade, Cornell economics professor Robert H. Frank referenced Conservapedia's article "conservative parables" to praise University of Chicago economics professor and 1991 Nobel laureate Robert H. Coase, whose “extraordinary insight was that the free market always reaches the most efficient level of productive activity, in the absence of transaction costs.” Chinese website 凤凰网 translated it two months later: 限额、交易和个人自由.

January 6, 2010: Local newspaper article "Conservapedia founder: We're fighting Wikipedia's liberal bias" by Rob Jennings, Parsippany (NJ) Daily Record, summarized in the Star-Ledger "Morris County resident, son of famous activist, runs 'Conservapedia' website." The article is reprinted on this right wing message board.

2009[edit]

December 2009[edit]

December 24, 2009: Creation Ministries International: Politicizing Scripture

December 8, 2009: Conservapedia founder Andy Schlafly appears on fake conservative pundit Stephen Colbert's television show and giggles nervously.

December 7, 2009: The Christian Science Monitor's opinion piece Translating the Bible is no joke. But what's in a political 'translation'? slams the Conservative Bible Project.

December 3, 2009: The Conservative Bible Project makes the Associated Press: Conservative Bible Project aims to rewrite scripture to counter perceived liberal bias (New York Daily News link).

November 2009[edit]

November 15, 2009: In an article on the 40th birthday of the 'net, Conservapedia is described as "unintentionally hysterical" under a heading describing Wikipedia.

November 4, 2009: The Riverfront Times: Hallowed Be Thy Name: A member of the Schlafly clan figures to do the Lord's work by cleansing the Bible of its "liberal bias"

October 2009[edit]

Conservapedia strikes it big on the blogs with the Conservative Bible Project (see further references in the main article). The news has even made it to television and print (though not in America).

October 23, 2009: The Telegraph: Internet rules and laws: the top 10, from Godwin to Poe

6. Danth’s Law (also known as Parker’s Law)

States: “If you have to insist that you've won an internet argument, you've probably lost badly.” Named after a user on the role-playing gamers’ forum RPG.net.
Danth’s Law was most famously declared in “The Lenski Affair”, between microbiologist Richard Lenski and the editor of Conservapedia.com, Andrew Schlafly, who cast doubt upon Prof Lenski’s elegant experimental demonstration of evolution.

After what is widely held to be one of the greatest and most comprehensive put-downs in scientific argument from Prof Lenski, Mr Schlafly declared himself the winner.
8. DeMyer's Laws

Named for Ken DeMyer, a moderator on Conservapedia.com. There are four: the Zeroth, First, Second and Third Laws.
The Second Law states: “Anyone who posts an argument on the internet which is largely quotations can be very safely ignored, and is deemed to have lost the argument before it has begun.”

The Zeroth, First and Third Laws cannot be very generally applied and will be glossed over here.

October 22, 2009: In his article Now 'Conservatives are Twisting Scripture', even Joseph Farah at WorldNetDaily thinks the project "is incredibly stupid and misguided".

October 22, 2009: Religion Dispatches:The Conservative Bible Project: Looking for Conservative Diamonds in a Liberal Dung-Hill.

October 20, 2009: Christianity Today: Conservapedia's Bible Removes Passages

October 19, 2009: The Baltimore Sun's article Jesus Of Nazareth As Dick Cheney discusses the Conservative Bible Project.

October 19, 2009: Evangelical Textual Criticism: Conservapedia Bible Project - Free of Corruption by Liberal Untruths?

October 18, 2009: The Tennessean's article New Conservative Bible will eliminate 'liberal' text quotes Biblical scholar and Wheaton professor Doug Moo, "Silly is probably as kind as I could be about it".

October 13, 2009:

البشاير: مشروع لإنتاج"كتاب مقدس"بدون ليبرالية (translated: A project to produce a "holy book" without liberalism)

October 9, 2009: Salon: Actual verses from the “Conservative Bible”

October 7, 2009: Andy appears on Fox News, being interviewed by Alan Colmes, discussing the liberal bias in the Bible. He comes off second best.

October 6, 2009: New York Daily News: Conservapedia.com's Conservative Bible Project aims to deliberalize the bible.

October 6, 2009: ScienceBlogs: The Conservative Bible Project

October 6, 2009: New Republic: Fixing the Bible

October 6, 2009: The Atlantic: The Bible: Conservative Edition

October 6, 2009: Hot Air: Do Conservatives Need Their Own Bible Translation?

October 5, 2009: Time: Coming Soon: the New International Free-Market Bible

October 5, 2009: Harper's Magazine's article titled From the Department of Self-Parody comments on the Conservabible.

September 2009[edit]

September 29, 2009: Episcopal Café: The Bible is too liberal

September 3, 2009: Richard Dawkins publishes The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, which makes a passing and disparaging reference to Andy and the Lenski affair in Chapter 5, Before Our Very Eyes:

There is a comic sequel to this triumphant tale of scientific endeavour. Creationists hate it. Not only does it show evolution in action; not only does it show new information entering genomes without the intervention of a designer, which is something they have all been told to deny is possible (‘told to’ because most of them don’t understand what ‘information’ means); not only does it demonstrate the power of natural selection to put together combinations of genes that, by the naïve calculations so beloved of creationists, should be tantamount to impossible; it also undermines their central dogma of ‘irreducible complexity’. So it is no wonder they are disconcerted by the Lenski research, and eager to find fault with it.
Andrew Schlafly, creationist editor of ‘Conservapedia’, the notoriously misleading imitation of Wikipedia, wrote to Dr Lenski demanding access to his original data, presumably implying that there was some doubt as to their veracity. Lenski had absolutely no obligation even to reply to this impertinent suggestion but, in a very gentlemanly way, he did so, mildly suggesting that Schlafly might make the effort to read his paper before criticizing it. Lenski went on to make the telling point that his best data are stored in the form of frozen bacterial cultures, which anybody could, in principle, examine to verify his conclusions. He would be happy to send samples to any bacteriologist qualified to handle them, pointing out that in unqualified hands they might be quite dangerous. Lenski listed these qualifications in merciless detail, and one can almost hear the relish with which he did so, knowing full well that Schlafly – a lawyer, if you please, not a scientist at all – would hardly be able to spell his way through the words, let alone qualify as a bacteriologist competent to carry out advanced and safe laboratory procedures, followed by statistical analysis of the results. The whole matter was trenchantly summed up by the celebrated scientific blogwit PZ Myers, in a passage beginning, ‘Once again, Richard Lenski has replied to the goons and fools at Conservapedia, and boy, does he ever outclass them.’

May 2009[edit]

May 11, 2009: Humeur site Cracked includes Conservapedia among its 5 terrifying bastardizations of the Wikipedia model. The article leads to a flurry of new (and probably doomed) user registrations at Conservapedia.

May 10, 2009: Little Green Footballs: Conservapedia’s New and Improved Non-Commie Bible

April 2009[edit]

April 23, 2009: Vanity Fair carries a scathing report titled Conservapedia: Bastion of the Reality-Denying Right.

February 2009[edit]

February 17, 2009: Pravmir, the Russian Orthodox Church web site, mentions Conservapedia in an article discussing Christian "clones" of popular web sites in its article Атака церковных клонов, или о христианизации популярных интернет-брендов (translation).

January 2009[edit]

January 23, 2009: A post on Wonkette titled Conservative Wiki Offers Helpful List of Senate Democrats To Assassinate, So Republican Governors Can Appoint GOP Replacements attacks a parody article posted on Conservapedia: Senate Democrats from States with Republican Governors on the grounds that it constitutes a hitlist. The offending article, which had been edited by several Conservapedia administrators prior to deletion, disappeared when Conservapedia's server crashed a couple of days later, and has since been protected from recreation.

2008[edit]

December 2008[edit]

December 15: San Francisco Weekly's article Point of (a Great) View uses Conservapedia's stance on the Truth as an illustrative example to introduce a piece about adults disagreeing.

December 3, 2008: In its article Mejia: User-generated content: A fad, or here to stay?, the Yale Daily News uses Conservapedia as an example of "...the tendency toward groupthink. This is easy to see on political Web sites like Huffington Post or Conservapedia that are largely ideologically homogenous". Andy thinks they are complimenting Conservapedia (since his reading comprehension is so poor), because in the previous paragraph they write: "But user-generated content needs to be taken more seriously by the regular media in order to remain relevant."

August 2008[edit]

August 1, 2008: The Washington Times: SHEFFIELD: Conservatives miss Wikipedia’s threat

Faced with such bias, many people on the right seem willing to retreat from the Wiki Wars, resorting to legal maneuvering to block particularly noxious entries and crying foul about Wiki unfairness. Still others on the right have withdrawn to their own site, Conservapedia.

July 2008[edit]

July 1, 2008: L'affaire Lenski is getting Conservapedia some mockery press attention in the Guardian article Conservapedia has a little hangup over evolution.

June 2008[edit]

June 30, 2008: Ars Technica: Bacteria evolve; Conservapedia demands recount

June 25, 2008: New Scientist Blogs: Creationist critics get their comeuppance

However, a far more amusing response came from Andrew Schlafly, the boss of Conservapedia. This, you may recall, is an alternative version of Wikipedia that aims to "correct the biases" of the original site - it has, for example, a young-Earth creationist viewpoint on evolution.

Schlafly wrote a brusque open letter to Lenski, expressing "skepticism" about his claims and demanding to see the data. Lenski replied, saying that the data were publicly available in the paper, and correcting a major misunderstanding in Schlafly's letter (he misread our article as saying there were three new proteins in the mutant culture, which we didn't say and was not the case). Schlafly wrote back, in shirty tones, demanding the data in their raw form for "independent review" - meaning that Conservapedia should be allowed to reanalyse it, without it being mucked about by corrupt evolutionist scientists. And at this point Lenski must have had enough.

His response was long and detailed. He patiently explained the science (again), pointed out (again) that all the data were available, and explained that in theory he could send them samples of the bacteria so they could test them for themselves (but that in practice this was illegal as they lacked the proper facilities).

June 24, 2008: In the article Of Bacteria and Throw Pillows, science writer Carl Zimmer writes about the Lenski affair on ScienceBlogs.

June 15, 2008: Stars and Stripes: Faith takes strange forms on the Web

Parody religions misappropriate religious tenets in premeditated acts of parody.

Take, for example, Last Thursdayism. The idea is a spinoff of "young-Earth" creationism, a belief that the universe was created by God 6,000 years ago with the appearance of being more than 13 billion years old.
Last Thursdayists believe the universe was created last Thursday, but appears to be older because of a divine hoax. All of so-called history, including our memories and the mold on the cheese in our refrigerators, were fabricated by the creator to make us think we’ve been here for years.
Actual young-Earth creationists seethe at the idea.
"The fallacy in this parody is that it fails to recognize that the creation of something out of nothing will inevitably appear to the naive to be older than it actually is," pans Conservapedia, a Web site that caters mostly to evangelical Christians. "A creation of a man, for example, would appear to a naive observer as though he existed for decades."

Last Thursdayists concur wholeheartedly.

June 14, 2008: Not only does Stars and Stripes mock Conservapedia in an article about strange religious beliefs in its article Faith takes strange forms on the Web, but Andrew Schlafly decides to publicize the embarrassment.

May 2008[edit]

May 21, 2008: The Hour features Andy Schlafly.

May 17, 2008: Ben Caleca at the Michigan Daily unwittingly joins in the Ides project with some commentary and disgust on his blog.

January 2008[edit]

January 12, 2008: Thom McCombs of the Vallejo Times-Herald responds to an anti-ACLU editorial in the article Defending the ACLU (archived & not found). When referring to the writer of the opinion piece, McCombs says "Do they really believe the garbage that they get from Conservapedia and spew onto these pages, or do they just hate the Constitution, and think that swiftboating the ACLU is a way to bring it down?"

January 1, 2008: Damian Thompson's book Counterknowledge: How We Surrendered to Conspiracy Theories, Quack Medicine, Bogus Science and Fake History mentions Conservapedia on one page, right next to CreationWiki. He didn't like either of them.

2007[edit]

December 2007[edit]

December 25, 2007: Haaretz's article Your Wiki Entry Counts features an interview with a hardcore Wikipedian - resulting in a very pro-Wikipedia article. Conservapedia is mentioned in the article:

Conservapedia, for example, sprang up last year as a reaction to what the conservative-Christian Web encyclopedia calls Wikipedia's "liberal bias."
"You have to start with a baseline when dealing with knowledge, and Wikipedia does air on the side of science," Shankbone retorts, referring to the fact that many of Conservapedia's articles support the creationist point of view.

December 13, 2007: In a video titled How Ridiculous are Conservatives? released on their YouTube channel, The Young Turks discusses the pages that have the most views on Conservapedia.

December 6, 2007: In an article about GodTube, a sane writer for the Michigan Daily refers to Conservapedia as a "propagandist endeavor" (4th paragraph).

November 2007[edit]

November 20, 2007: The Atlantic reveals What Conservapedia Is Really About. Conservapedia is really not about homosexuality. Not at all.

November 2, 2007: Conservapedia receives a mention in the AP article on GodTube (7th paragraph), published by CNN.

November 2, 2007: Fox News: GodTube Provides Christian Web-Video Alternative

GodTube is among religion-based Web sites that closely copy popular secular models.
MyChurch.org is similar to the social networking site MySpace, and Conservapedia.com is the religious right's response to the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.

September 2007[edit]

September 3, 2007: Blast magazine: Thoughts on a Conservapedia

July 2007[edit]

July 25, 2007: San Diego City Beat: Sickopedia

July 23, 2007: The Register: Conservapedia too pinko? Try Metapedia

July 13, 2007: In the YouTube videos The Inconvenience of Truth (Part One) and The Inconvenience of Truth (Part Two), Mark Pesce uses a comparison of the various encyclopedia articles to derive lulz from Conservapedia.

July 11, 2007: Queerty: Conservapedia Knows The Gays

July 1, 2007: Conservapedia gets a few mentions in an Observer piece on Jimmy Wales and Wikipedia titled For your information.

June 2007[edit]

June 29: The Institute for Creative Thought Crimes's article Conservapedia and The War Against Truth discusses Conservapedia's Factual Relativism.

June 27, 2007: Conservapedia makes the big time! On the Daily Show, Lewis Black reports on Conservapedia, complete with screenshots, and featuring the article on homosexuality. The report is accessible from Crooks and Liars: Daily Show: Lewis Black Exposes Right Wing Media Paranoia. Despite driving significantly more traffic than other media references have, Conservapedia not only doesn't trumpet this on its front page, it deletes references to it.

June 20, 2007: The Register picks up the report of the LA Times, Need hard facts? Try Conservapedia. RationalWiki is mentioned.

Unlike the L. A. Times piece, the Register's article is mocking and tongue-in-cheek. I don't think it should be mentioned on the main page. I would be very annoyed if someone put this on the main page in a way that implied that this was positive coverage; it is not.
Dpbsmith's wise disclaimer in the editimg that gives the article link

June 19, 2007: The Los Angeles Times article A conservative's answer to Wikipedia mentions RationalWiki.

The [15 year-old] girl, who is home-schooled, wrote an article for Conservapedia on Irish dancing and uses the site to research papers. But the biggest lesson she's taken away as a young conservative is: "There are people who want to destroy us."

June 18, 2007: 5 de Septiembre: Conservapedia: Mucho conservadurismo y poca enciclopedia (translated: Conservapedia: Much conservatism and little encyclopaedia)

June 13, 2007: Freakonomics Radio: Hate Wikipedia? Start Your Own

June 6, 2007: The Guardian: Is Wikipedia too liberal for you?

A columnist just criticized Conservapedia, probably expecting to win support for it. Instead, the columnist herself is widely criticized by the public. See the column and the numerous public criticisms of it here."
—Conservapedia front page on the Shinyshiny (a girls' guide to gadgets - hmmmm) article

June 6, 2007:

Ynet: בקטנה: הגירסה הימנית של ויקיפדיה (translated: The right-wing version of Wikipedia)

June 4, 2007: "Conservapedia continues to attract mainstream press attention. Boston Globe columnist Alex Beam's comments on Pat Robertson reveal a case study on objectivity." - Conservapedia front page opinion of Alex Beam, regular columnist at the Boston Globe, who write the article Just the facts -- and they're always right.

May 2007[edit]

May 10, 2007: Press-Telegram: Conservapedia, QubeTV mimic popular sites with spin to right

May 8, 2007: San Francisco Chronicle: Popular Web Sites Breed Political Copies

Conservatives often decry a liberal bias in the media and elsewhere. Some even see it in some of the Internet's most popular destinations.

Conservapedia.com is a politically bent mimic of the online encyclopedia Wikipedia.com, which Conservapedia claims is "six times more liberal than the American public."
Launched last November, Conservapedia has a logo composed of the American flag and labels itself "the trustworthy encyclopedia." It claims over 9,300 "clean" entries, far less than Wikipedia's 1.7 million articles in English.

On Conservapedia you will find more favorable entries on President Bush, creationist views and a daily Bible verse. (There is also a creation-science wiki — a Web site that allows collaborative authoring — called CreationWiki.) Conservapedia was founded by New York attorney Andrew Schlafly (son of political activist Phyllis Schlafly) and, the site explains, by a "large, advanced group of homeschoolers" in New Jersey.

April 2007[edit]

April 30, 2007: Computing's article Christians take on YouTube with GodTube notes that GodTube "is similar to others which take popular websites and seek to add an alternative spin, such as Conservapedia.com, MyChurch.org and MuslimSpace.com".

April 24, 2007: The Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung: „Conservapedia“: Gegenaufklärer im Netz (translated: "Conservapedia": Counter-Enlightenment on the Net)

April 21, 2007: History News Network: What's the Difference Between Wikipedia and Conservapedia?

April 12, 2007: 조선일보's article “위키피디아는 이제 못믿어” (translated: "I cannot believe Wikipedia now") mentions Citizendium, Conservapedia and Scholarpedia.

April 12, 2007: El País: Conservapedia, la respuesta de la derecha de EE UU contra Wikipedia (translated: Conservapedia, the US right response to Wikipedia)

March 2007[edit]

March 27, 2007: Scripps Howard News Service: Conservapedia.com -- an encylopedic message from the right

March 27, 2007: MK News: 온라인 백과사전 진보와 보수 대결 (translated: Online Encyclopedia Progressive and Conservative Confrontation)

March 25, 2007: Helsingin Sanomat: Tietosanakirjan tulevaisuus (translated: The future of the encyclopedia)

March 23, 2007: Bem Paraná: Versão conservadora da Wikipedia causa polêmica nos EUA (translated: Conservative version of Wikipedia causes controversy in the US)

March 21, 2007: According to Time's article 10 Questions: Jimmy Wales, Jimmy Wales thinks Conservapedia is biased.

March 19, 2007: Metro: Weird, wild wiki on which anything goes

March 16, 2007: Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Conservative Web site counters the 'bias' of Wikipedia

March 13, 2007: Robert Siegel talks with Andrew Schlafly about Conservapedia on NPR's article Conservapedia: Data for Birds of a Political Feather?.

March 11, 2007: Toronto Star: Conservative wants to set Wikipedia right

March 10, 2007: APC: Wikipedia vs Conservapedia

March 9, 2007: Наш город's article Возраст Земли – шесть тысяч лет (translated: Age of the Earth – six thousand years) mentions Conservapedia's take on creationism.

March 8, 2007: The New York Times: Conservapedia: The Word Says It All

March 7, 2007: Courrier international: Et Dieu créa Conservapedia (translated: And God created Conservapedia)

March 6, 2007: Spiegel Online: Wikipedia for Christian Fundamentalists: The Lord's Encyclopedia

March 6, 2007: 网易新闻: 维基·危机 (translated: Wiki crisis)

March 6, 2007: The Christian Post: Conservapedia Challenges 'Anti-Christian' Wiki

March 5, 2007: The New York Times: Conservapedia: See Under "Right"

March 5, 2007: 20 minutos: Conservapedia, una 'wikipedia' para mantener los valores cristianos y americanos (translated: Conservapedia, a 'Wikipedia' for maintaining Christian and American values)

March 4, 2007: ECommerce Times: Conservapedia: Far Righter Than Wikipedia

March 2, 2007: The Guardian: Conservapedia - the US religious right's answer to Wikipedia

March 2, 2007: Благовест: Американские евангелики создали «Консервапедию» как альтернативу «Википедии» (translated: American evangelicals created "Conservapedia" as an alternative to "Wikipedia")

March 2, 2007: Heise: Conservapedia: christlich-konservative Alternative zu Wikipedia (translated: Conservapedia: Christian conservative alternative to Wikipedia)

Macrch 2, 2007: The Chronicle of Higher Education: A Wikipedia for the Right Wing

The site is, as its name suggests, a conservative response to what it bills as Wikipedia’s “increasingly anti-Christian and anti-American” sentiment. Predictably, left-leaning blogs have had a field day with that statement, and they’ve relished many of Conservapedia’s more florid phrasings: Ronald Reagan is “considered by many to be the greatest American President,” for example, and kangaroos have legs that are “strong and powerful, designed by God for leaping.” (To be fair to the site, left-wing pranksters have already logged on to add plenty of their own parodic passages, so it’s hard to know how much of Conservapedia’s material was written by card-carrying conservatives.)

While many pundits have treated the site as a cheap joke, Conservapedia does raise a few substantive issues. The site was founded by Andy Schlafly, a conservative writer and attorney (and the son of Phyllis Schlafly, the right-wing activist who founded the Eagle Forum), and much of the foundational material was written by home-schooled high-school students from New Jersey. Writing for The Guardian, Conor Clarke sees in Conservapedia’s creation story “the logical conclusion of a slightly worrying trend:”

Conservapedia, as its name implies, does not aspire to objectivity. Nor does it aspire to fairness. It aspires to give you the impression that there’s always a second, equally valid interpretation of the facts.

March 1, 2007: The Guardian: Rightwing website challenges 'liberal bias' of Wikipedia

March 1, 2007: The Guardian's article A fact of one's own discusses Conservapedia's objectivity.

February 2007[edit]

February 28, 2007: Wired: What would Jesus Wiki?

February 28, 2007: Information World Review: Conservapedia takes on Wikipedia 'bias'

February 26, 2007: New Scientist Blogs: A conservative rival for Wikipedia?

February 26, 2007: The Atlantic's Conservapedia Contest! challenges readers to "find the single most ridiculous entry in the Christianist version of Wikipedia, Conservapedia".

February 26, 2007:

nrg: שמרנופדיה (translated: Conservative-pedia)

February 24, 2007: The Atlantic: Conservapedia?

Hey, it's a post-modern world, and truth isn't always truthiness.

February 23, 2007: Huffington Post: Introducing “Conservapedia”—Battling Wikipedia’s War on Christians, Patriots

February 22, 2007: Daily Kos: Conservapedia

February 22, 2007: Discover: Conservapedia

February 21, 2007: The ScienceBlogs article on Conservapedia and Math discusses the state of Conservapedian mathematics.