RationalWiki's 2020 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 who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

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: $720Goal: $3500


From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

This RationalWiki related article has not received a brainstar for quality. Please consider expanding the article appropriately. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Information icon.svg Do you have a general question about the site?
If it is technical, go to Technical support. If it is about the community or the content of the wiki, go to the Saloon bar.
This talk page is for discussing the contents of our article on RationalWiki only.
This page is automatically archived by Archiver
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>

Needs Citation[edit]

"RationalWiki (RW) is a community working together to explore and provide information about a range of topics centered around science, skepticism, and critical thinking."

"Rational" and "Scientific" on this site is used as double-speak. It's really just gate-keeping through ostrazisation and exclusion. It's not scientifically motivated by curiosity but politically motivated by power.

"Concepts which have proved useful for ordering things easily assume so great an authority over us, that we forget their terrestrial origin and accept them as unalterable facts. They then become labeled as 'conceptual necessities,' etc. The road of scientific progress is frequently blocked for long periods by such errors." - Albert Einstine

A paradigm-shift is going to occur in physics soon. If you snide fuckers don't start being honest with yourselves and the world you live in. You're going to encounter some bad karma. Save yourselves some grace and stop giving into ideological power-plays. You can do that, you have courage right?

"Politically motivated by power," this wiki has a slight left leaning bias in favor of socdems, it used to be hardcore liberal but thankfully those days are (mostly) over, this site is less shitty than it used to be, as for said "paradigm shift," can you elaborate on what that is? Oxyaena Harass 12:26, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Can this site get rid of the pretense objectivity?[edit]

At least that way it would have some integrity, rather than parading left-wing ideology around as objective truth. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: SigButt.png on the toolbar above the edit panel. (You can indent successive talk page comments using one more colon (:) for each line.) Thank you. Christopher (talk) 13:50, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article?. Of course, if you think our "left-wing ideology" is bad, you're always free to challenge it. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 15:50, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
@ Here's a comment with absolutely no pretense to objectivity whatsoever: you're not just a turkey, but an utter dingus as well, for missing this. Pip-pip cheerio! Reverend Black Percy (talk) 18:18, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Just wanna say you have an outright lie on this page, you say that mediabiasfactcheck has you ranked the same as wikipedia, when in actuality the website has you rated as having a moderate liberal bias and if you look at community votes extreme left is in the lead by 40 votes. Either remove the section where you say that or edit it to reflect the truth please. Aoau (talk) 16:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
@Aoau What parts do you consider lies? How do they qualify as lies? How exactly does an opinion poll count as truth? Please reply so that we can try to resolve this matter. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 16:49, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Im just a left leaning personality that fell on your alt-right page. Those comments from your integrity in 2017 : spot on. You have a strong left leaning bias on this website, it is pretty obviou and authoritarian in my honest opinion. If back in 2017 it wasn't obvious how detrimental it was for the quality of the website and its usefullness, now it is. It require a remedy for neutralisation, otherwise the name of the website stands as a joke, as it should read rationalisation wiki. — Unsigned, by: / talk

"But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki!" Drink!. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 20:45, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Im just a left leaning personality" And then in the very next post. "american academia probably shares this kind of opinion, knowing that a bunch of radical feminists are present day managing large scale nuclear arsenals, it is chilling to see the country with this military apparatus and this intelligence apparatus turn that quickly that far to the left" As I like to say, if you're going to lie, either do it well or not at all. You suck at lying. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 20:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

What happened?[edit]

I haven't been here in years. When did this place get infested with SJWs and faggots? — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

I believe the SJW-faggot infestation started in 2008. Herr FüzzyCätPötätö (talk/stalk) 16:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

This Wiki is anything but "Rational!"[edit]

A wiki is supposed to be facts, not speculation or a place to launch personal attacks on someone you don't like or believe. Provide scientific proof against a claim, but 99% of this wiki feels like the anger of a 12 year old. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki! Also, please sign your talk page comments with ~~~~. L̤̈ÿ̤n̤̈n̤̈R̤̈ (̈ẗ̤ä̤l̤̈k̤̈)̈ (̈c̤̈ö̤n̤̈ẗ̤r̤̈ï̤b̤̈s̤̈)̈ @ 17:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
1) A wiki is just a type of website, it's not "supposed to be" anything (although this particular wiki does aim to be factual). 2) If you were to point to a specific page or section that is a personal attack or feels like the anger of a 12 year old (and given how many pages we have there are bound to be some) I'm sure someone would remove it, but instead you choose to make a vague, general, unsubstantiated claim that serves no purpose. Christopher (talk) 18:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
Gonna guess that BoN/Rationalpolice is referring to Ghost hunting TV shows, on which I rolled back his replacement of a 20kB article with "REMOVED OPINIONATED ATTACK. Wikipedia is a place for facts, not speculation." a few minutes before he started this thread/registered. Daev (talk) 04:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Should we break it to the BoN that this isn't Wikipedia? GrammarCommie (talk) 04:26, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
Facebook has this wonderful feature called "like". You can even "like" in multiple ways. And now I'm seeing on some posts you can add points to each comment for when you want to keep actual score - ya know so it counts the people who specifically didn't like it and doesn't count them as equal to the people who can't even read. Well, I like this post here at this part of the page. I feel like there are some folks who just think this is some kind of a joke website, like theonion.com (which is not a real newspaper). — Unsigned, by: TheNextGenWins / talk / contribs
The fact is that the real rational wiki (with all its limits) is Wikipedia. This is just some childish project of someone who thought "I know the Truth and I'm gonna PROVE it to you, like, with science!" and then resorted to ad-hominem attacks ("notorious homophobe", "UFO believer", "racist") and hand-wavy dismissals. Look guys, we all had that type of feeling, when you think you can set the record straight with your careful debunking of stupid opinions. But you need to have rigorous rules in place for that, and apply them to yourself first. Wikipedia attempts it, you don't. Fail. (talk) 14:54, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia's not bad. We don't hate wikipedia. This wiki serves a more direct role of calling bullshit bullshit without equivocation. Wikipedia's policies make it so a reader has to infer that a notorious homophobe is one. We just say it. ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 15:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Do these people just autogenerate these comments and decide to share them here? They all sound the same. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 20:49, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@LeftyGreenMario I lean toward the idea that they really are just stupid and interchangeable. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)


Change your name to SJWiki[edit]

Because that's what you actually are. Your wiki has nothing to do with rationality. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

I think you're in the wrong place. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario! 02:19, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
Gonna pretend to engage you. What is rationality? Conceptually, without respect to the particular things you're currently wrong and angry about what do you think defines rationality? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 02:23, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Possible lede cquote[edit]


oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 17:32, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

RationalWiki displays "Math extension can not find Restbase URL" error instead of content[edit]

Currently, the RationalWiki page is broken:

[71d70b75f473c953f997d4d2] /wiki/RationalWiki MWException from line 200 of /srv/rw_common/extensions/Math/MathRestbaseInterface.php: Math extension can not find Restbase URL. Please specify $wgMathFullRestbaseURL.


#0 /srv/rw_common/extensions/Math/MathRestbaseInterface.php(339): MathRestbaseInterface->getUrl(string)
#1 /srv/rw_common/extensions/Math/MathRestbaseInterface.php(138): MathRestbaseInterface->getCheckRequest()
#2 /srv/rw_common/extensions/Math/Math.hooks.php(385): MathRestbaseInterface::batchEvaluate(array)
#3 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/Hooks.php(195): MathHooks::onParserAfterTidy(Parser, string)
#4 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/parser/Parser.php(1393): Hooks::run(string, array)
#5 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/parser/Parser.php(455): Parser->internalParseHalfParsed(string, boolean, boolean)
#6 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/content/WikitextContent.php(331): Parser->parse(string, Title, ParserOptions, boolean, boolean, integer)
#7 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/content/AbstractContent.php(497): WikitextContent->fillParserOutput(Title, integer, ParserOptions, boolean, ParserOutput)
#8 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/poolcounter/PoolWorkArticleView.php(139): AbstractContent->getParserOutput(Title, integer, ParserOptions)
#9 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/poolcounter/PoolCounterWork.php(123): PoolWorkArticleView->doWork()
#10 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/page/Article.php(673): PoolCounterWork->execute()
#11 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/actions/ViewAction.php(44): Article->view()
#12 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/MediaWiki.php(493): ViewAction->show()
#13 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/MediaWiki.php(288): MediaWiki->performAction(Article, Title)
#14 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/MediaWiki.php(735): MediaWiki->performRequest()
#15 /srv/rw_common/core/includes/MediaWiki.php(509): MediaWiki->main()
#16 /srv/rw_common/core/index.php(43): MediaWiki->run()
#17 /srv/rw_common/config/wrapper.php(17): require(string)
#18 {main}

--Dan Harkless (talk) 10:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC)