|
Nominations and Campaigning for the 2024 RationalWiki Moderator Election are now open |
Talk:Taxobox
? Frohlich 11:16, 15 December 2008 (EST)
trying to make a taxobox like on wikipedia. can't get it to work. anyone who can help, please help. sending out duress signal: Weeoo weoo weeoo--"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorcat! 11:20, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- You need to copy this little lot over. & there appear to be several other templates incorporated into it so you've quite a task ahead of you. Best of luck! Frohlich 11:27, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- (There seems to be an unclosed "<sup>" in your sig. Frohlich 11:29, 15 December 2008 (EST)}
- Why the hell do we need a taxobox; we aren't Conservapedia, we trust Wikipedia. Harmonic educated Hoover!
- He(?) wants to play - let him. You'll need some help with templates; start here as a suggestion. Frohlich 11:40, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- I'm not playing. I just think that we should just provide as much info as possible about science, math, crazy Conservapedians, anti-science movements, etc. Taxomamy definitely falls into cat number 1 (obvious), 3 (the deny relationships between species), 4 (ditto), and 5 (okay, maybe not 5). --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorcat! 12:23, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- Only issue I've got with that is where do we stop, anyhow? If we're doing all the stuff that the anti-science and fundie types subvert, then we're talking enormous chunks of science, law, history, literature, philosophy, and on and on, most of which is done way better on WP since they have much better resources than we do. --Kels 12:26, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- Why should we stop? Wikipedia is fantastic, but there's no reason to make articles on things that they have articles on, assuming it isn't just a cut and paste job. Anyway, the reason its done better on WP is because they try harder. If we tried harder, we could do much the same. Now, who wants to help --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorcat! 12:30, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- Only issue I've got with that is where do we stop, anyhow? If we're doing all the stuff that the anti-science and fundie types subvert, then we're talking enormous chunks of science, law, history, literature, philosophy, and on and on, most of which is done way better on WP since they have much better resources than we do. --Kels 12:26, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- I'm not playing. I just think that we should just provide as much info as possible about science, math, crazy Conservapedians, anti-science movements, etc. Taxomamy definitely falls into cat number 1 (obvious), 3 (the deny relationships between species), 4 (ditto), and 5 (okay, maybe not 5). --"ConservapediaUndergroundResistorcat! 12:23, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- He(?) wants to play - let him. You'll need some help with templates; start here as a suggestion. Frohlich 11:40, 15 December 2008 (EST)
- Why the hell do we need a taxobox; we aren't Conservapedia, we trust Wikipedia. Harmonic educated Hoover!
- (There seems to be an unclosed "<sup>" in your sig. Frohlich 11:29, 15 December 2008 (EST)}
STOP - I was joking above. we do not NEED this on this wiki - we are NOT an encyclopedia. Frohlich 12:35, 15 December 2008 (EST) (AND SORT YOUR SIG OUT)
- I'm giving the taxobox up (but not the rest (I am still going to add more science as long as I can connect it to anti-science (taxonamy certainly fits in)))-CUR
Would some kind Sysop delete this & Template:Pp-template please. Frohlich 13:11, 15 December 2008 (EST)
Also a note to CUR, templates go in the template: namespace... we have a lot of good stuff about how to do wiki things, and how we do things here, at the "help files" link, in the navigation box, top left of every page. ħuman
20:26, 15 December 2008 (EST)