From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Smash fascism.gif
This user smashes Nazis and their defenders into small pieces with extreme prejudice.
# This user chats on Discord as luigifan9790.

Yo, I'm the Internet Wanderer Luigifan, and I stumbled upon this website through TV Tropes while piddling around one day (well, before they deleted their page on this site…). To put it bluntly, this place is hilarious, and it's really made me rethink several beliefs that I've held for a long time, particularly my faith in Catholicism (well, this place and Reddit[note 1]). I still identify as Catholic, but, well, let's just say that I don't take it as seriously as I used to.[note 2]




Launched Pages


A "mini-essay" is, loosely speaking, a large edit to a page that is (usually) mostly confined to note-references which takes an essay-like form, but is too narrow in scope and/or dependent upon the rest of its host page for context to be placed in essayspace. Mini-essays generally aim to elaborate on a point raised in the host article, play devil's advocate to a point and provide potential rationales for things that look weird or dodgy, support or temper a harsh criticism, and/or bring up an opposing argument so that said argument can be addressed, clarify the meaning of a statement for people who are new to RationalWiki and don't fully understand the snarky/scientific point of view, or serve some other utility role for their host page. A lot of these mini-essays are possibly too opinionated for mainspace, need more citations, or may even be inaccurate (as I generally write them off the top of my head), so I would greatly appreciate feedback on them (and perhaps some writing support).

IMPORTANT UPDATE: As of May 15, 2024 and continuing until some undetermined point in time, I will no longer be inserting mini-essays directly into pages, due to many of them having proved to be rather… problematic. Instead, I will be declaring intended mini-essays within a special sandbox (User:Luigifan18/Mini-essay review board) where I include snippets from mainspace articles where I have written ref notes and other "mini-essay"-type potential edits and opening them up to discussion and feedback from the community, culminating in an ATIM-style vote on whether or not they should be included. Hopefully this hews more closely to my original intent to have my mini-essays be subjected to scrutiny, feedback, and approval or rejection from the RationalWiki community, without risking the inadvertent defilement of RationalWiki mainspace articles.

Pages where I've written mini-essays that have received minimal feedback

These are mini-essays that I've written that have not yet been reviewed and approved or disapproved of by other editors.[note 6] Please feel free to take a look at them and let me know what you think![note 7] (Bear in mind that all revision links lead to the edit where the mini-essay was originally created; these pages (and the mini-essays) may have been updated since then.)

Pages where I wrote mini-essays that were later deemed unworthy of mainspace

These are mini-essays I added to pages that were later removed by myself or other editors due to being detrimental to the quality of their host pages. Some of these have been moved to essayspace because I felt that they could stand on their own and were worth salvaging; others will simply languish in the fossil record unless I can think of a way to rewrite them into something that's actually useful.

Pages where I wrote mini-essays that are quality additions to the article

I won't be moving anything here based on my own opinions alone, since that would defeat the point of RationalWiki's mobocracy. If you think one of my mini-essays is a great addition to its page, please tell me that you like it and why you approve! (Either my own talk page or the talk page of the host article will be suitable, but please specify the location of the mini-essay if you use the former, or ping me if you use the latter.) If I get enough approval (say, at least three such remarks), I'll move a mini-essay here.

So far, this section is empty.


  1. I happen to be active on both /r/religiousfruitcake and r/antitheistcheesecake, and I often find myself feeling the need to tell both of them to stop blindly hating on each other… I've actually created a community named /r/fruitandcheese to serve as neutral ground between them, but only time will tell how that turns out.

    EDIT: As of April 7, 2024, probably not very well, as I got myself banned by putting my foot in my mouth by hastily saying "The only good Nazi is a dead Nazi". I didn't mean that as an endorsement/advocation of violence (I was thinking more of death by natural causes or the consequences of their own actions), but there really is no excuse for how that couldn't be taken the wrong way. I'm trying to appeal the ban (well, "appeal" might be the wrong word; I think I deserve to be banned, I just don't think I deserve a permanent ban), but the formal appeal form's limitations (mainly a 500-character limit and one-attempt limit) prevented me from making an effective apology (in both senses of that word), so the main appeal got rejected. I have tried to appeal using the account help form, but I don't have any idea whether or not that will work (I haven't gotten any feedback on my ticket even being read). And since I didn't appoint any other moderators on r/fruitandcheese due to not being able to find any other users I could trust to remain reasonable, accommodating to both sides, and relatively neutral in debates between theists and atheists, the prospects for its survival don't look good. The whole situation is my fault, really, but… damn, I can't help being upset.
  2. Those who knew me on GameFAQsWikipedia from about 2007 to 2010 will know what I mean. If you don't recognize the name "Furry Fiasco", well, explaining would end up requiring me to type multiple pages' worth of tropes and stuff.
  3. This was originally placed in the one world religion page, but Cosmikdebris felt that it was editorializing, and after pondering the matter for a while, I came to agree.
  4. I say "loose consensus" because many people in the modern day are morally repulsed by the very concept of eugenics (again, in large part because what the Nazis did with the idea was freaking horrible), and are therefore completely unwilling to even consider any arguments in its favor. In short, modern opposition to eugenics is derived just as much, if not more, from emotional reactions than from logical arguments against it (such as "we can't predict the long-term repercussions of eliminating certain traits from the gene pool, especially since those traits very well might end up being helpful in adapting to some sudden environmental change") or well-reasoned moral arguments against it (such as "everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness").
  5. Technically, I didn't make this page; Bongolian was the one who set it up. However, I did make the Saloon bar topic that inspired it in the first place, so I figured that it's only fair that I take at least some of the credit.
  6. The original name of this section was "Pages where I've written miniature essays that really need to be reviewed and fact-checked by people who have more time to devote to research than me", but that was so dang wordy that it ate up about a third of the allotted character limit of an edit summary all by itself (and it was really dang unwieldy to link to this specific section of my user page in other talk pages, the Saloon bar, or ATIM), so I eventually decided to change the section name.
  7. I would suggest using a rating system akin to the system used by the Dungeons & Dragons homebrew wiki (I was quite active there throughout the 2010s), which would admittedly be useful as a firm basis for deciding if one of my mini-essays is "community approved" or "community opposed". However, I don't want to burden the admins with copy-pasting a whole multi-template system from another wiki just to evaluate one user's [particularly extensive] contributions, especially since we already have a perfectly good system for rating the overall quality of our articles.
  8. My original plan for this edit was to have notes nested within notes, but I had to scrap that because I just couldn't get it to work properly.
  9. Okay, this one's not totally uncited — I did a bit of fact-checking at TV Tropes. I could have sworn they used to have something about ancient people thinking that silver was literally light in a solid form…
  10. Ioe bidome did incorporate this into the article proper, but I'd still like some other users to weigh in on this before moving it to the "approved" section.
  11. Part of my musings were later trimmed down and incorporated into the article proper by CircularReasoning, but given that the rest has been left as is, I'm not moving this mini-essay into the "accepted" or "rejected" sections just yet.
  12. Seriously, I wrote my college honors thesis on that book. It wasn't on the subject of bigotry, though.
  13. Yes, I linked to Wiktionary, not RationalWiki or Wikipedia. This is because I'm referring to "sacrifice" in the general sense of giving something up (usually in exchange for something else), not the specific religious usage of offerings to gods. Both RationalWiki and Wikipedia's pages on the concept of sacrifice primarily describe the religious usage of the term.
  14. I wasn't going to count this as a mini-essay, but it somehow caused a borderline HCM 5 situation.
  15. It's about dang time I tackled this page seriously, considering I named one of the Progress Pokémon after this guy…
  16. While these are technically two separate mini-essays, they were both created in the same revision. As such, I'm lumping them together in the "rejected" section, even though only one of the mini-essays was rejected.
  17. Admittedly, perhaps I took it too seriously…
  18. I was one of the voices who objected to its removal on the grounds of the page being a naturalistic explanation for the origins of morality. Maybe if I get my mop back, I'll look into restoring it and rewriting it in a way that doesn't have nasty implications.
  19. I think RationalWiki already has an article on this subject, but I can't remember what it's called.