Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>
Can this site get rid of the pretense objectivity?
- On talk pages, please sign your comments using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking on the sign button: 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, LeftyGreenMario! 15:50, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
According to this (easycounter), rationalwiki.org has Google PR 5 and its top keyword is "korea wiki"; this website also offers a comparison with conservapedia. There are some reviews here (mywot) (currently 66, overall positive). --Cmonk (talk) 01:03, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Given various regular discussions by proponents of particular viewpoints, should there be 'What Rationalwiki is' and 'What Rationalwiki is not' articles? (Or one combined article if more appropriate)
What Rationalwiki is
- The 'ideology' of RW is that 'arguments, discussions, and theses' should have a certain minimum level of correctness, understanding of the concepts, verifiableness and external support.
What Rationalwiki is not
- It is not the other place.
- Anything relevant from 
- It accepts more robust behaviour and opinionated discussions than the other place (but contributors should still be courteous/not abusive).
- I think RationalWiki:Community Standards covers a lot of what you're talking about. Spud (talk) 06:23, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
- I believe the SJW-faggot infestation started in 2008. oʇɐʇoԀʇɐϽʎzznℲ (talk/stalk) 16:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
This Wiki is anything but "Rational!"
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: 18.104.22.168 / 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)