RationalWiki's 2019 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 who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2019.

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: $3680Goal: $6000

User talk:Spud

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

"William Lane Craig" article - logical fallacy[edit]

I saw you reverted my change to the Craig article. The argument that "looks like a logical fallacy" to you is in fact a valid application of modus tollens or "denying the consequent", not an application of the (fallacious) inference pattern affirming the consequent.

I'm not going to revert it or reply again about this. Leave the article in whatever state you like. (Sorry if it's bad form to bring this up here, I'm not familiar with wiki etiquette.)— Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Holydaze Template[edit]

It looks great, mate! I think you should add a link for the national anthem of the ROC for maximum effect. :-) Nerd (talk) 13:36, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

@Nerd You asked for a link to the national anthem, I have provided the link. I hope that's what you meant. But like I said, anyone can edit the template now. Spud (talk) 13:48, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, indeed! It is precisely what I meant. Thanks! Nerd (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Urgent Email[edit]

Can you please check your inbox? I sent an Email that I consider to be urgent. --Confidental Message (talk) 00:01, 2 October 2018 (UTC)


Just throwing this out there, couldn't we just move "Jesusween" to Funspace, similar to the Jesusland article? ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 11:45, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I would not object to a separate Jesus Ween (that was the official spelling) Funspace article. I think that the best thing to do is to have a paragraph about Jesus Ween in the main section of the Halloween page. There is a good Huffington Post article about Jesus Ween from 2011. I plan to create a paragraph about Jeus Ween using that article as a reference in the next few days. It's worth mentioning for how ridiculous it was. But it's definitely not worth having a separate section about Jesus Ween on the Halloween page. It was just a flash in the pan thing from seven years ago. Spud (talk) 12:14, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Understandable, blowing such an isolated event out of proportion would be hypocritical, given that we collectively advocate against such behavior. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 12:18, 7 October 2018 (UTC)


Hey, what happened to RationalWikiWiki? Did a bunch of right-wing brigadiers mass report it or something? Also, you planning on reviving it? The files can be downloaded. I contacted the staff and they said the files will only be downloadable for 30 days but the Doctor Who General, Trollpasta, and (I believe) Soundboard Prank Calls wikis were all banned longer ago than that and are stil downloadable so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

...oh, and if you're wondering why I didn't use my NightmareofEden account to ask this over at Community Central, it's because I'm blocked there. EattheRich (talk) 14:03, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

@EattheRich See User talk:Bigs#RationalWikiWiki for everything anyone knows about why it was closed and for talk of a possible revival. Spud (talk) 15:39, 12 October 2018 (UTC)