![]() Reception Analysis Īndrea Ballatore, a lecturer in GIS at Birkbeck, University of London, categorizes RationalWiki as similar in tone to Snopes in a 2015 study, finding it to be the third most visible website when researching conspiracy theories in terms of Google and Bing search results, and the most visible among those sites that made openly negative value judgments about conspiracy theories. ![]() Both RationalWiki and Conservapedia were "more loaded with moral content". In contrast, Wikipedia's content leaned slightly liberal and editors leaned centrist. 2023 compared text on controversial topics across multiple community-managed wikis, they found that content and contributors on RationalWiki leaned liberal while Conservapedia leaned conservative. Mic described RationalWiki as "progressive". 2019 and Knoche et al., two articles about classifying a writer's biases via text analysis, asserted that Conservapedia was "conservative" and RationalWiki was "liberal". ![]() Lester Haines of The Register stated: "Its entry entitled 'Conservapedia:Delusions' promptly mocks the claims that 'Homosexuality is a mental disorder', 'Atheists are sociopaths', and 'During the 6 days of creation G-d placed the Earth inside a black hole to slow down time so the light from distant stars had time to reach us'." īoth Yan et al. RationalWiki contributors, some of which are former Conservapedia contributors, are often highly critical of Conservapedia, and according to an article published in the Los Angeles Times in 2007, RationalWiki members "by their own admission" vandalize Conservapedia. Some activity on RationalWiki is used for critiquing and "monitor Conservapedia". ![]() Many RationalWiki articles mockingly describe beliefs that RationalWiki opposes, especially when covering topics such as alternative medicine or fundamentalist Christians. It is written from a self-described "snarky point of view" and "scientific point of view" (both abbreviated as SPOV) rather than a " neutral point of view" (NPOV), and publishes opinion, speculation, and original research. RationalWiki differs in several ways from the philosophy of Wikipedia and some other informational wikis. RationalWiki provides information about pseudoscientific theories and to educate "individuals with unorthodox views". The humor in the article is a running gag in the wiki and is not the result of vandalism. Screenshot of RationalWiki's article on goats. After being reverted and blocked, "Lipson and several other contributors quit trying to moderate the articles and instead started their own website, RationalWiki". He and Conservapedia administrators "questioned credentials and shut down debate". Conservapedia is an encyclopedia established by Andy Schlafly as an alternative to Wikipedia, which Schlafly perceived as suffering from a liberal and atheist bias. In April 2007, Peter Lipson, a doctor of internal medicine, attempted to edit Conservapedia's article on breast cancer to include evidence against Conservapedia's claim that abortion was linked to the disease. RationalWiki has been described as liberal. Its stated goals are to "analyze and refute pseudoscience and the anti-science movement, document ' crank' ideas, explore conspiracy theories, authoritarianism, and fundamentalism, and analyze how these subjects are handled in the media." It was created in 2007 as a counterpoint to Conservapedia after an incident in which some editors of Conservapedia were banned. RationalWiki is an online wiki which is written from a skeptical, secular, and progressivist perspective.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |