MediaWiki talk:Newarticletext

ICE: that wp link goeth to the wrong page methinks (I can't edit it cause its prortected) Frohlich 00:49, 16 December 2008 (EST)

It is a dynamic link. If the person is viewing that message for the page Robin Toner, then it will link to wp:Robin Toner, whereas when you are viewing it for the page MediaWiki:Newarticletext you see a link to the article wp:MediaWiki:Newarticletext. -- Icewedge // talk 01:47, 6 November 2008 (EST)

Aah, I see, Sorry for jumping the gun. (do we really want to send people off to WP though?) Frohlich 00:57, 16 December 2008 (EST)

Froh, I agree in concept with your concern, although I also see the point of Ice's addition. I heavily edited it to reflect these "priorities"... ħuman 01:35, 16 December 2008 (EST)

Lol, you overwrote me human ([1]). -- Icewedge // talk 01:47, 6 November 2008 (EST)

Sorry, my bad. I think I might have edited the "old" version (the diff I was reading). Sorry 'bout that. Yr gems follow. ħuman 01:52, 16 December 2008 (EST)

Eh, its fine, oh and your solution is a good one. -- Icewedge // talk 01:47, 6 November 2008 (EST)

If someone wants info on whatever link they clicked WP is not a bad place to start and as a relativly not-for-profit website I think there is no problem in being helpful as opposed to designing the site like a huge trap for web surfers here to exploit them for AdSense clicks. -- Icewedge // talk 01:47, 6 November 2008 (EST)

To answer CUR's question because I am fucking sick of CP. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:16, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Why is everyone using foul language? And Pi, this site was set up to critize CP. But fine. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is GilliamM (no, I'm not!)} 21:17, 6 February 2009 (EST)

First of you are pissing everyone of so they are going to swear at you. Second of all, no it was set up to refute the anti-science and anti-intellectual movement which CP is an almost insignificant part of. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:19, 6 February 2009 (EST)

It has expanded. But CP is still one of the main focuses. And I am annoyed by your behavior- but I do not swear. I suggest you hold your tongue. If you desire to swear, be more creative. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is GilliamM (no, I'm not!)} 21:23, 6 February 2009 (EST)

CP maybe on of your main focuses but the rest of us have moved on. Fuck; fuck; fuck; fuck! - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:25, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Taken from the main page:

Our purpose includes the following:

1. Refuting and analyzing the anti-science movement, ideas and people
2. Refuting and analyzing the full range of crank ideas - why do people believe stupid things?
3. Essays and works on authoritarianism, religious fundamentalism, and other social and political constructs

Nowhere in that list do I see anything about Conservapedia. Pinto's5150 ^Talk 21:25, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Then please explain why over half of our articles are on CP, if it isn't a focus. --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistor^{is GilliamM (no, I'm not!)} 21:26, 6 February 2009 (EST)

It is not a focus it is an obsession. More than half those articles in CP space come from some newbie fresh from their banning on CP wanting to write about it and it gets dumped there so we don't delete it and hurt their feelings. - User $\scriptstyle -i\ln(-1)$ 21:29, 6 February 2009 (EST)

"over half of our articles are on CP" - I doubt that is even close to true. And, no, there is no point whatsoever in a link to CP on the text above the new article/red link editing box. ħuman 22:23, 6 February 2009 (EST)