User talk:Pinkerite
Welcome[edit]
Bongolian (talk) 07:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Are you the actual Pinkerite?[edit]
Cuz if so you do the lord's work. Amen. Carthage (talk) 20:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
- wow thanks - but no more than the gang at RationalWiki, which is far more influential - which is why the Manhattan Institute is so mad at you all. Pinkerite (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Sysop[edit]
Carthage (talk) 18:30, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Pinker[edit]
Could you help improve the Steven Pinker article, cuz so far our article glosses over his connections to the racialist movement. Carthage (talk) 18:34, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
Happy to help - I'll get on that soon. Pinkerite (talk) 18:38, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
- Bit of advice for responding. You don't need to create new sections to respond. Just format with :. Carthage (talk) 18:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your formatting assistance here and elsewhere, much appreciated. Pinkerite (talk) 18:52, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
E. O. Wilson[edit]
Just a heads up if you create an E. O. Wilson page. There was a previous version of such a page that was deleted. The consensus reason seemed to be that page was highly-skewed towards his racialism to the point of hyperbole, and was unlikely to be improved by the creator of the page (Draft talk:E. O. Wilson). A new page on him should have some sort of summary of his scientific work to start with. Bongolian (talk) 19:44, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I will take a shot at making an improved version. Pinkerite (talk) 20:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)
Jerry Coyne[edit]
Our article on Coyne is hot garbage. Can you update it when you have the time? Carthage (talk) 13:07, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Proposition[edit]
I take it you are Generalrelative on Wikipedia who has recently been going after Richard Lynn, Is there any chance we can debate you on Ed Dutton's discord? LuteCurrie (talk) 13:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
- No I am not Generalrelative on Wikipedia, and when I want to go after Richard Lynn, I do it on Pinkerite. Pinkerite (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
Question: why are racialist misogynist ghouls such chickenshit cowards? Pinkerite (talk) 18:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
- LuteCurrie is a real person, he writes for racist Mankind Quarterly, he has sock-puppets on Wikipedia. He wrote a flattering biography of Emil Kirkegaard at imdb [1]. However, Mikemikev is known to impersonate others on here, including Currie. My talk-page is locked to new users, that is the best way to get rid of trolls. Johns (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the info. I still haven't received a response from Dutton after trying to contact him via the college email address listed on his website. I will report when he responds, or in a week or so, whichever comes first. The last items posted (before it was removed - thanks moderators) on the topic was from someone referring to me as Catlady, so it was either Kirkegaard or one of his pathetic goons.Pinkerite (talk) 16:08, 26 August 2023 (UTC)
- UPDATE: well it's been over a month now, and I tried two different email addresses to contact Dutton and ask him what this "debate you on Ed Dutton's discord" is all about - but dead silence.
Image uploads[edit]
Images from recent commercial films are not likely to be public domain. In such cases, you should use the Fair Use licensing. I have updated the File:DICAPRIO.jpg licensing, accordingly. Bongolian (talk) 02:18, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
Tireless worker[edit]
![]() |
Tireless Worker Award | |
For outstanding work on the E. O. Wilson page. |
A couple of minor points:
- I put in a couple of "citation needed" tags where I could not find the citations, and where it would be appropriate.
- You've frequently relied on Internet Archive links for copyrighted books. These may not be stable links due to the lawsuit against Internet Archive, which had an unfavorable initial ruling for the Archive regarding copyright infringement. The lawsuit is currently on appeal.[2]
Bongolian (talk) 03:33, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the kudos and info. I'll keep watching for what happens with the Internet Archive lawsuit, ready to change the links if necessary. And thank YOU for the improvements you've made to the E. O. Wilson article! Pinkerite (talk) 03:37, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
"Manhattan Institute Death Star"[edit]
Isn't it the other way around, given that the Manhattan Institute is the one funding City Journal? Carthage (talk) 08:27, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, you're right, it's not a good analogy. I'll remove it. Pinkerite (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
Nina Paley[edit]
For a long time I only knew of her because of her galaxy-brained centrist "both sides bad" video on the Israel-Palestine conflict. She'd prolly make for a good article. Carthage (talk) 15:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah... I might start out with adding a section to Kiwi Farms about people who have defended or supported that org. She is definitely an example of an especially noxious form of self-righteous and feckless TERF Pinkerite (talk) 15:18, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- She hasn't kept much of a following. I put her in the ignore bin, myself. Chillpilled (talk) 16:57, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
- She's very friendly with the wingnut sociobiology network, as I documented, as well as being a Kiwi Farms apologist, and she's notable enough to have a Wikipedia entry. She deserves some mention, although possibly just as part of the KF article, not her own article. Pinkerite (talk) 17:23, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
Wpl[edit]
When using {{wpl}}
, the first parameter is for the Wikipedia page you want to link to, the second is for what the link displays as on RW, and the third is for punctuation directly after the link so that the logo will go after the punctuation, which looks better and is proper formatting. E.g. {{wpl|Example|This is an example|.}} becomes This is an example. I notice you are often adding ||.}} to the end of the template for no apparent reason; only do that if you want a period to show after the link, as otherwise it makes the formatting/punctuation confusing. You can see the documentation for more details. Plutocow (talk) 05:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
A modest critique[edit]
I find myself disagreeing with a few points of your latest blogpost. The first one I'll mention is this:
Capitalism was not created by a bunch of heartless monsters out to destroy the world. It evolved in response to the problems of daily human existence.
I don't find many socialists, at least no one who actually knows their shit, disagreeing with this. Many of the "evils" of capitalism are conducted out in the open as the result of banal, heartless economics. People becoming homeless because they became priced out of the housing market. Indigenous peoples being kicked off their land and brutalized in order for an oil pipeline to be built or for more monocultural plantations and ranches to be set up. No one is seriously invoking conspiracy here, because there's no need to.
And the claim that capitalism led to "the spread of slavery" is easily disputed by the many and varied forms of slavery that have existed outside of the age of capitalism.
This is a truthism. American slavery absolutely was perpetuated through the profit motive. A big reason why the Founding Fathers decided to preserve slavery was because the slave system was the foundation of their livelihoods. If slavery was abolished they'd lose their privileged economic status. I think the argument that slavery predates capitalism is both an irrelevant truism and an example of whataboutism, because it ignores local conditions.
Capitalism is just a collection of human-value exchange mechanisms, basically an accounting system, which is being mistaken for the actual root causes of human error and weaknesses and bad judgment.
I think you're mistaking markets with capitalism itself. Capitalism requires a community of displaced laborers with no other option but to sell their labor or starve. This problem wasn't found in feudalism, which required a community of landed laborers. You note this in your article too:
The death of feudalism — a hierarchical system often seen as oppressive that kept poor people bonded to their masters’ land, which they farmed in exchange for a place to live and military protection — also left rural British peasants with no homes and no work, which eventually funneled them away from the countryside and into urban centers. These former farm workers then had to sell their labor in a newly competitive work environment in order to survive, while the state worked in concert with the new capitalists to establish a maximum wage and “clamp down on beggars.”
Capitalism is a socioeconomic system that is distinguished by its reliance on a class system of landless laborers who don't own the means of production.
As for Watson's claim that capitalism is responsible for "runaway climate change" I think that's a case of "correlation is not causation." While climate change may have happened during the age of capitalism, humans destroying their environment and the phenomenon of unintended consequences also exist outside of capitalism.
I think this is also an irrelevant truism. Capitalism incentivizes environmental degradation through the profit motive today. Just because this isn't a phenomenon unique to capitalism doesn't mean the relevant social conditions that cause eco-catastrophe today are the same as ones prior. Different times, different systems, different conditions, although there are undoubtedly similarities. All the negative externalities of ecological degradation are shunted onto the ones not responsible, or less responsible, for the damage. For example, the global south will overwhelmingly bear the brunt of climate change despite wealthy nations overwhelmingly contributing the most to global emission rates ([3]).
Feel free to correct me if I got anything wrong or misinterpreted your article in any way. Best regards, Carthage (talk) 16:27, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- First, thanks for reading the blog. Second you've given me a lot to consider, but just to start with one item: "This is a truthism. American slavery absolutely was perpetuated through the profit motive." - depending on how narrow your definition of "profit" is - is there any other reason for slavery? Pinkerite (talk) 16:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- There could be many, certainly. But I find a lot of those reasons to be justifications, if we decide to include wider global contexts for the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade then a lot of the slave trade, on the African side, was fueled through a need to fund wars between and within the powers of West and Central Africa at the time. Historically the slave system in the New World was set up because of the mass deaths of the indigenous population previously used as a source of unfree labor, but by the time of 1776 slavery was definitely perpetuated through the wealth-generation it provided. A lot of the anti-black and white supremacist propaganda and policies being promoted at the time was pushed from the top-down because of economic, social, and political interests as Prof. Ibraham X. Kendi notes:
[Kendi] demonstrates that self-interested discrimination gives birth to racist ideas, not the other way around.
People who benefited from slavery spread the idea that black people were inherently inferior and better off under the hand of a white Christian master. People today explain deficits in education by talking about deficits they see in black children rather than deficits in educational systems or tax, hiring, housing and other policies and practices that disadvantage black families. ([4])
- Washington actually devised a fairly ingenious method to keep his slaves while the national capitol was in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania law dictated that any slave present in the state for six months or more would be declared free. Washington got around this by sending his slaves with his wife back to Mt. Vernon every six months so he could keep his slaves, and therefore his wealth. Incredibly ghoulish. Carthage (talk) 17:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- The issue at hand is not the methodologies of the American slave system, but rather my wondering what other motives exist for slavery outside of "profit." The American system is only one variation on slavery. There are many other examples of slave systems, from the ancient Egyptians, ancient Hebrews, Amerindians, Greeks, Romans, Africans, etc. etc. which occurred outside of the capitalist system we are talking about (said to have begun in 16th century Europe.) And slavery was rarely based on enslaving people based on ethnicity - so slavery does not always have to do with "racist ideas" per the Kendi quote. Pinkerite (talk) 17:25, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- (EC) True, but Kendi is specifically talking about the American system. One can also ascertain that the usage of forced prison labor as a source of cheaper labor than free labor is born out of the profit incentive. This specifically can also serve the dual purpose of slavery as a legal punishment, which itself also has a storied history. Another reason for slavery is to escape debt. Carthage (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- The issue at hand is not the methodologies of the American slave system, but rather my wondering what other motives exist for slavery outside of "profit." The American system is only one variation on slavery. There are many other examples of slave systems, from the ancient Egyptians, ancient Hebrews, Amerindians, Greeks, Romans, Africans, etc. etc. which occurred outside of the capitalist system we are talking about (said to have begun in 16th century Europe.) And slavery was rarely based on enslaving people based on ethnicity - so slavery does not always have to do with "racist ideas" per the Kendi quote. Pinkerite (talk) 17:25, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I know Kendi is talking about the American slave system - that's my point - it's not relevant to the issue at hand - at least the issue I thought was at hand: whether any form of slavery has ever existed without the profit motive. Slavery as a punishment is a possible alternative to profit, but does it exist outside of the capitalist system? As far as I'm aware, slavery as punishment is exclusively the result of the peculiar phraseology of the 13th Amendment. I'd be interested in other examples if you have them. Slavery as a source of cheap labor means somebody's profiting, even if it's the state.
- It could depend on how you define "profit" - I maintain that slaves were always some form of "profit" if you define profit as some benefit to the slave owner. The point being that it isn't only Capitalism that has provided a motive for slavery, as Watson seems to suggest.
In the Roman world there were many different ways someone could be forced into slavery. These included children born into slavery, people captured in war, individuals who were sold or self-sold into slavery and infants abandoned at birth. Less common were children sold by their parents, people being enslaved for debts or as punishment for crimes and people who were victims of kidnapping and piracy. We know of two slavery markets in the city of Rome. One was by the Temple of Castor in the Forum, the other near the Saepta Julia in the Campus Martius.
- Slavery in Ancient Rome - British Museum.
In the case of the Romans slavery as punishment for a crime wasn't common but it wasn't unheard of. Of course there could still be a profit motive at play, since the definition of slavery is unfree labor. Carthage (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'd bet there was a profit, in that slaves who were enslaved as punishment were probably put to work for the state or perhaps the aggrieved party. Pinkerite (talk) 18:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
Nooceleration[edit]
Anatoly Karlin was recently attacking you on Wikipedia on about 10 pages before being ban-hammered. He now claims to be a far-leftist [5] but this reads as a hoax. It looks like satire to me, do you know anything about this? 157.245.35.63 (talk) 17:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update - I'm glad to hear Anatoly Karlin was banned from Wikipedia. Do you have more information about what he was saying about me and where on Wikipedia he said it? Pinkerite (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Karlin has had about 50 blocked accounts on Wikipedia. The comments I saw were left on general relative's talk-page and several others but have been deleted by admins. He was asking you and another user to have his Rational Wiki article updated claiming that he and Hanania have been unfairly libelled as far-right when they are apparently now far-left. I find it hard to believe he is now pro-LGBT and far-left. I believe his manifesto is a hoax, he still claims to support eugenics and race realism so he hasn't really changed, if you click on his Tweet he has copied a line from Hanania. He seems to be copying Hanania "Why I Used to Suck, and (Hopefully) No Longer Do" essay. 109.123.74.178 (talk) 17:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Wow is Karlin really that delusional? Anybody who looks at his recommended blogroll can see it's chockablock full of right-wingers and racist ghouls. And wow is he mad at Rational Wiki - keep up the good work, Rational Wiki! Pinkerite (talk) 18:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
- Karlin has had about 50 blocked accounts on Wikipedia. The comments I saw were left on general relative's talk-page and several others but have been deleted by admins. He was asking you and another user to have his Rational Wiki article updated claiming that he and Hanania have been unfairly libelled as far-right when they are apparently now far-left. I find it hard to believe he is now pro-LGBT and far-left. I believe his manifesto is a hoax, he still claims to support eugenics and race realism so he hasn't really changed, if you click on his Tweet he has copied a line from Hanania. He seems to be copying Hanania "Why I Used to Suck, and (Hopefully) No Longer Do" essay. 109.123.74.178 (talk) 17:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Andreessen[edit]
Who, or what, is Andreessen? Carthage (talk) 16:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
Moved[edit]
I moved your Richard Haier work over to the draftspace. —cosmikdebris talk stalk 17:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Hmm[edit]
For some reason I can't reach your website. Is it down? Carthage (talk) 21:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Award[edit]
![]() |
Tireless Worker Award | |
For your work on reviving the Richard Haier article |
--Goatspeed. Fossil evidence of my evolutionCircularRasoningSteal my ideas 01:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Twitter links[edit]
Because of the ephemerality of links from Shitter, can you please use archived versions of tweets as citation material? Carthage (talk) 17:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, you're right. I will fix that soon. Pinkerite (talk) 17:07, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I already replaced the Shitter links on Steven Pinker's page with archived versions, so you don't need to worry about that. Carthage (talk) 17:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)
Coop[edit]
A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment.
Oldman4 (talk) 13:15, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
- Please comment as soon as possible before some moderator gets to frame this the wrong way. Cromptonite (talk) 13:51, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
All things in moderation[edit]
A case involving you has been raised at All things in moderation. Feel free to comment. GeeJayKWhere all evil dwells Where every lie is true 17:43, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
about Biological determinism[edit]
Hello, I would like to suggest a change to the "Biological determinism" page. The sentence, "Biological determinism (often shortened to "bio-determinism" and used synonymously with biologism or genetic determinism) is a common fallacy that implies that biology does and should completely dictate human behavior or the behavior of a certain subset of humans, such as black people or males," inappropriately makes an arbitrary judgment about the correctness or incorrectness of biological determinism. I need to know if you would reject this change so I can decide on my next steps.
--Justthinksd (talk) 05:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Might be better to take it up on the article's talkpage, rather than the talk page of some random RW user. John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (talk) 10:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- While I don't think of myself as "some random RW user," I do agree that a discussion on the Talk page of the article is the best way to go. Pinkerite (talk) 11:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- So what's your answer?--Justthinksd (talk) 12:42, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- While I don't think of myself as "some random RW user," I do agree that a discussion on the Talk page of the article is the best way to go. Pinkerite (talk) 11:35, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- My answer is - talk to people who are interested in the article, which I didn't contribute to and don't have time to get involved in. There are likely some people who are interested, so take your concerns to the article's Talk page. What part of that don't you understand? Pinkerite (talk) 12:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- Remember what you said. If you are going to reject my changes, please discuss it on the talk page first.--Justthinksd (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- My answer is - talk to people who are interested in the article, which I didn't contribute to and don't have time to get involved in. There are likely some people who are interested, so take your concerns to the article's Talk page. What part of that don't you understand? Pinkerite (talk) 12:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
- I meant "random user" in the informal sense that you, personally, don't own the article in question; as such, whatever you tell them won't necessarily be what the community at large wants for that article. John Jacob Jingleheimer Schmidt (talk) 11:41, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
@Justthiksd If you think you have just been given carte blanche to say something racist (or sexist), you are very much mistaken. Spud (talk) 13:05, 16 May 2025 (UTC)
Deletion of Bell Curve[edit]
I noticed Pinkerite has complained of article deletions by behind the scenes/sneaky legal actions; the Bell Curve article was today deleted for unexplained legal reasons - can the RMF make a statement to clarify if this is the end of the article deletions? Or is there more to come? If so what ones? I mean are articles like and London Conference on Intelligence and remaining? Pinging a bunch of people from old convo @Spud @Bongolian, @DuceMoosolini, @Christopher, @Plutocow, @Tetrapteryx. It seems very odd some "HBD" stuff is being removed but others left up. There is no logic to it. 67.205.153.253 (talk) 19:52, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- A reason was given in the deletion log ("this needs a complete rewrite to be compliant with the legal settlement").[6] I am not privy to further information, and I doubt there will be any further information until all the litigation is finalized. Bongolian (talk) 19:58, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- Which will be when? And I assume the problem is that the name of the author of TBC is now censored everywhere on RW and that's why it's not compliant. What an insane deal with the devil. Does anybody know when the move to Oregon is happening? 10K has been collected for it. Pinkerite (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- Many innocent people donated over $10,000 to RationalWiki to fight those lawsuits. Instead of fighting, RationalWiki deleted the articles, never apologized, never gave any detailed explanation, never gave any updates, never hired legal aid and stole the money and have refused to pay anyone back. RW is an utterly fraudulent organization. Theft. 128.1.171.83 (talk) 00:21, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- Which will be when? And I assume the problem is that the name of the author of TBC is now censored everywhere on RW and that's why it's not compliant. What an insane deal with the devil. Does anybody know when the move to Oregon is happening? 10K has been collected for it. Pinkerite (talk) 20:08, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
The BoN's allegations are completely untrue. We did hire legal aid. We have followed legal advice. The site notice always stated that the money was being raised to move the Foundation to Oregon, not to fight lawsuits. We are in the process of moving to Oregon, thanks to those donations. None of the money raised was paid to anyone who tried to sue us or was pocketed under false pretenses. We have not refused to give anyone a refund. If anyone wants their money back, they can have it. There has, however, been no theft or fraud. Spud (talk) 02:36, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- They need to remove all names on this list [7], until that happens this website cannot not move on. It makes no sense why they deleted some but not the rest. Just delete the racialist stuff and go back to missional content, debunking creationism and anti-vax nonsense. 2A0B:F4C2:4:0:0:0:0:110 (talk) 00:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- (ec) For the eight millionth time, Racialism is pseudoscience and it is therefore missional to be "analyzing and refuting" it. And there's no reason to remove content we're not getting sued over just because it falls under the same category as lawsuit-related content. Should we also blank the other categories SLAPPed articles fell into (which, for the record, does include the Anti-vax movement)? No. This cry to return to a false sense of missionality hasn't swayed anyone before, and it's not going to.
– Regards, Avarice This is the third time I've had to explain this to a random IP 01:33, 30 May 2025 (UTC)- Well said, @Avarice, thanks. Looks like one of the "delete all racialism articles" trolls is here. I wonder who they're working for? Pinkerite (talk) 01:41, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- (ec) For the eight millionth time, Racialism is pseudoscience and it is therefore missional to be "analyzing and refuting" it. And there's no reason to remove content we're not getting sued over just because it falls under the same category as lawsuit-related content. Should we also blank the other categories SLAPPed articles fell into (which, for the record, does include the Anti-vax movement)? No. This cry to return to a false sense of missionality hasn't swayed anyone before, and it's not going to.
- They need to remove all names on this list [7], until that happens this website cannot not move on. It makes no sense why they deleted some but not the rest. Just delete the racialist stuff and go back to missional content, debunking creationism and anti-vax nonsense. 2A0B:F4C2:4:0:0:0:0:110 (talk) 00:45, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
List of rules[edit]
Would anybody who is privy to the terms of the deal that resulted in the removal of the article for TBC send me a list of rules to meet compliancy before I take a crack at rewriting the article? I assume rule #1 is that the name of one of the authors must not be mentioned. Pinkerite (talk) 20:20, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- It's probably best for you to wait 'til the Oregon move is complete before publishing a second version of the article, though you can work on it offline of course. Plutocow (talk) 20:31, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- is still mentioned multiple times in mainspace, , and hasn't been deleted. He's much more famous than any of the other people whose articles were deleted. If mentioning his name at all was forbidden, surely a rewritten article on his book would have been off the cards. Christopher (talk) 21:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
- ~ "is still mentioned..." Oops! Redacted! Pinkerite (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- And yet the deletion statement mentions that the article can be rewritten, it just has to comply with the settlement. Antares (talk) 01:00, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- There is no way to discover the terms of the settlement, AFAIK, which makes compliance difficult. But if the name can be yanked from a user's talk page it doesn't seem likely it will be permitted on an article. But maybe things will be different after the Oregon move is complete. Pinkerite (talk) 02:27, 31 May 2025 (UTC)
- Good to know that the (physical? legal? both?) move to Oregon is not complete. When I was revising Pro-natalism, I googled a name I did not know and the first hit was that person being interviewed by the RH whom I think we are not allowed to talk about any more. So not knowing the rules makes it difficult to write and edit articles. And since the TESCREAL space is densely networked with eugenics and racialism, its not practical to leave those topics out (even Larry Page has been talking about how maybe humans need to make way for our posthuman successors, which sounds a lot like how Untermenschen have to make way for Herrschervolk or the Indians are all vanishing and all that can be done is to describe them and collect some trinkets and bones for museums).Polydamas (talk) 01:39, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- If it were up to me I'd shut down the wiki entirely until the move was finished. But that's the Board's call, not mine. In the meantime it's probably smart practice to watch what you write until further notice. Antares (talk) 02:15, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think I am done making edits and especially new articles except for copyediting and adding links and such. May resume after the move is announced and policies are clearly stated given that a citation to an academic publication in my local university library got removed for having the wrong author. I hope that mirroring some articles (anti-natalism needs pro-natalism) and adding some weird Internet jargon has been helpful.Polydamas (talk) 16:00, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- As of a couple of weeks ago, the move to Oregon has begun, per this documentation so I assume there will be an announcement on RW soon. Pinkerite (talk) 17:34, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think I am done making edits and especially new articles except for copyediting and adding links and such. May resume after the move is announced and policies are clearly stated given that a citation to an academic publication in my local university library got removed for having the wrong author. I hope that mirroring some articles (anti-natalism needs pro-natalism) and adding some weird Internet jargon has been helpful.Polydamas (talk) 16:00, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- If it were up to me I'd shut down the wiki entirely until the move was finished. But that's the Board's call, not mine. In the meantime it's probably smart practice to watch what you write until further notice. Antares (talk) 02:15, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- is still mentioned multiple times in mainspace, , and hasn't been deleted. He's much more famous than any of the other people whose articles were deleted. If mentioning his name at all was forbidden, surely a rewritten article on his book would have been off the cards. Christopher (talk) 21:25, 29 May 2025 (UTC)
Murderbot[edit]
OK this is off-topic, but it's my talk page so... if anybody here is not watching Murderbot, you need to do that now. It's up to episode four, a new one is posted each Friday - or sometimes like today, Thursday. Whether you've read the books or not, you will like it. Well, except the people here representing neo-Nazis - because it is gloriously woke. Pinkerite (talk) 02:06, 30 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'm watching it. Loved the books, enjoying the series. It's a pity it's on Apple TV which reduces its availability.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 06:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- GREAT! I'm planning to do an article here on Murderbot, although right now I'm waiting for the Oregon dust to settle. Pinkerite (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- While I am a MB big fan - I'm not sure how you would write an article which focuses on the RW mission.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 07:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- Well seeing as there's an article here about My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, I think an article about a science fiction book/TV show with a main character who resonates with transgendered people; and those on the autism spectrum; set in a world with multiple genders, group marriages, no racial hierarchies; and where the bad guys are corporations might be sufficiently missional. Pinkerite (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- OK, but we are not an encyclopedia and every article must stand on its own merits. If you felt that those other articles were not mission-worthy then you could start and AFD. But the current question is why would a potential MB article fall squarely under the mission statements.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:13, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think my previous comment makes it pretty clear why it would fall under the mission. And I have no problem with a page for My Little Pony, it's completely valid - I am a fan of MLP FIM and considered adding to that article, since the phenomenon of Russian censorship of MLP FIM is missing. And BTW, the Contents of RW does not align perfectly with the official Mission Statement. I'm in favor of expanding the mission statement to reflect the contents, rather than deleting a bunch of articles to align perfectly with the mission statement. In terms of the influence of RW - which is why I'm here - the more articles the better. Pinkerite (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- The thing you need to explain is why MB would fall under the current mission statements. You might have a way to do it and that that is the issue you face.
- Talking about other articles and changing the mission statements smacks of whataboutism and deflection.
- If you have not read it, you might also want to read RationalWiki:What is a RationalWiki article?. I am really not trying to pick a fight here, just responding to you comment about creating an article about a SF character you happen to like.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 05:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
- I think my previous comment makes it pretty clear why it would fall under the mission. And I have no problem with a page for My Little Pony, it's completely valid - I am a fan of MLP FIM and considered adding to that article, since the phenomenon of Russian censorship of MLP FIM is missing. And BTW, the Contents of RW does not align perfectly with the official Mission Statement. I'm in favor of expanding the mission statement to reflect the contents, rather than deleting a bunch of articles to align perfectly with the mission statement. In terms of the influence of RW - which is why I'm here - the more articles the better. Pinkerite (talk) 19:35, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- OK, but we are not an encyclopedia and every article must stand on its own merits. If you felt that those other articles were not mission-worthy then you could start and AFD. But the current question is why would a potential MB article fall squarely under the mission statements.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 18:13, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- Well seeing as there's an article here about My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic, I think an article about a science fiction book/TV show with a main character who resonates with transgendered people; and those on the autism spectrum; set in a world with multiple genders, group marriages, no racial hierarchies; and where the bad guys are corporations might be sufficiently missional. Pinkerite (talk) 13:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- While I am a MB big fan - I'm not sure how you would write an article which focuses on the RW mission.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 07:06, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- GREAT! I'm planning to do an article here on Murderbot, although right now I'm waiting for the Oregon dust to settle. Pinkerite (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- You certainly seem to be deliberately obtuse for someone who does not want to pick a fight. In relation to Murderbot, I mentioned Autism, Transgender, Racialism and Polyamory - all topics covered in Rational Wiki. And your response is make multiple inane comments about the mission while ignoring what I've already written. Why don't you stop it now. Pinkerite (talk) 05:22, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
...The wiki's mainspace welcomes many articles that do not relate to the primary missions of RationalWiki providing that they are factually accurate and of interest to the community at large.
Courtesy of this little page here. Whether or not an article on Murderbot would be missional is another matter entirely. Antares (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2025 (UTC)
In case anybody else here likes Murderbot[edit]
Clip from upcoming episode five. Pinkerite (talk) 13:07, 3 June 2025 (UTC)