RationalWiki's 2018 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 seeing this today donates $5, we will meet our goal for 2018.

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: $2951Goal: $5000

User talk:Christopher

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is automatically archived by Archivist
Archives for this talk page: <1>, <2>

I would like to thank you for your unblock...[edit]


I would like to thank you for reversing the block as you noted that the articles relating to Phobosgate (the absurd episode on Wikipedia with overlooked hate, not the conspiracy theory about the obscure Russian Fobos-Grunt space mission) in my userspace, as I still intend to make a very strong and serious case for the controversy on Wikipedia that got me banned five years ago through disruption incited by Russian media as well as Russian President Vladimir Putin (the chief manipulator of me and BatteryIncluded and the rest of Wikipedia), who I believe caused the Phobos sample return mission to fail upon launch in November 2011. I think Putin is going to have me banned again using the same reasons. This is part of Russia's hybrid warfare.

By the way, the article you moved back to my userspace, the one about the Fobos-Grunt mission, is not part of Phobosgate, though. I plan to remove references pertaining to Phobosgate, at least for the time being. I need to make sure it meets RW's mission. -- Bryan See (talk) 14:53, 28 September 2017 (UTC)


Don't block me. I can't vandalize Wikipedia because my school is blocked until after I graduate three years from now. :(— Unsigned, by: Kateri D! / talk / contribs

If you make your vandalism funny or make good edits as well then you won't be blocked, your Stephen Hawking edits weren't funny. Christopher (talk) 15:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
@Christopher: Blocked them. If you want to give them a second chance, fine by me. RoninMacbeth (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2017 (UTC)


But but but he's duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuumb. Can't I just make fun of an idiot? Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease? ikanreed 🐐Bleat at me 21:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

My talk page[edit]

Can you do something appropriate to whoever added the text I just removed (whose IQ is lower than room temperature on Pluto). I don't mind appropriate swearing, some of the weird fanfic and more obscure corners of RW (or even CP) but... Anna Livia (talk) 22:29, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Livia: The IP in question has been blocked for 30 days. If you want to block people who do similar things yourself, click here for more info. Christopher (talk) 14:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
It was not clear who had added the phrase in question - and to avoid 'two people confusing the computers (as they easily are) by doing the same thing at once.' Anna Livia (talk) 15:56, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

What is a reasonable time to block 'that IP twerp'? Anna Livia (talk) 18:27, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry if this is spam[edit]

About the ninja sword thing... —ѕυρяємє ℓєα∂єя вιgѕ σf gσαтιѕтαи (ᴡᴏʀᴅs ᴏғ ᴡɪsᴅᴏᴍ/ᴀᴄʜɪᴇᴠᴇᴍᴇɴᴛs) 22:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

My User/Talk pages[edit]

You removed the protection from my user/talk page as you perceived the reason for my applying it had passed - fair enough.

However vile language and a direct threat were put on those pages after you did so.

I know RW is more of 'an opinionated free-for all' than many parts of the wikiverse, and am not against 'spats, disagreements and sticking to views (even if I disagree with them)' or using 'strong language' - but this is entirely unacceptable behaviour.

I appear to be one of the few people on RW using a female byname (rather than a male or 'neutral name') - in the rest of the wikiverse wherever I have contributed I have never encountered more than an occasional 'difference of opinion' for myself or other persons using a female byname: here I have experienced really unpleasant behaviour twice in two months.

Therefore, can I, quite reasonably, deduce that RW contains a significant misogynist element - and, no, I do not see why I should be forced to take a genderless name. Anna Livia (talk) 22:03, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

@Anna Livia It's two different people vandalizing your talk page at the most, much easier to block them. Christopher (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
You can understand my sentiments - and female-usernames (actual or implicit) do seem to be scarce on RW (and more frequent elsewhere. Anna Livia (talk) 16:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
According to alexa the vast majority of RW's visitors are male, no idea how accurate that is though and it appears to say that the visitors are nearly 100% male but 20% female. Christopher (talk) 17:16, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
'Summat odd' in the last statistic (and the neutral-names and IPs will jumble the statistics). My comment about female (actual or implicit) names in the rest of the wikiverse is based on direct observation rather than statistical analysis.
In view of conversations elsewhere perhaps a 'RW users promoting lost causes group' might be appropriate :) Anna Livia (talk) 18:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
I don't think they go by usernames, they have gender based info on sites with no usernames involved. Christopher (talk) 18:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

I feel ya, how it feels like to be targeted on gender, but those vandals were trolls and don't represent RationalWiki. What's going on is some Grawp twat or imitator that harasses female users here and you'll just have to grin and bear it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC)