Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

San Francisco

2007-03-20T01:23:10Z

Raytrotter: Reverted back with minor edit and deleted unsourced, unrelated information.

'''San Francisco''' is a city in [[California]] and is generally considered one of the most beautiful cities in the world. It has a higher proportion of [[homosexual]]s than any other city in the [[United States]]{{Fact|date=March 2007}}, and in 2004, its mayor, [[Gavin Newsom]], attempted to perform [[same-sex marriage]]s despite the practice being explicitly illegal under California law. Not surprisingly, the marriages were nullified by the courts shortly thereafter.

San Francisco is well-known for its hi-tek and software industry and has been one of the most economically successful cities of the last twenty years.

Famous San Francisco landmarks include the [[Golden Gate Bridge]] and [[Alcatraz Island]].

Conservapedia:Abuse

2007-03-20T01:12:28Z

Raytrotter: /* Current Alerts */

<center><big>''Justice never sleeps''</big></center>

{|
|Quick Links 
[[Articles for Deletion|AFD]] 
[[The Conservapedia Commandments]] 
[[Conservapedia:Abuse|Abuse]] 
[[:Category:Speedy deletion candidates|Speedy delete]] 
|This is where you can report abuse of editing privileges. Please make notes short and concise. Crossed out notes have been dealt with.
|Archives
[[Conservapedia:Abuse/archive1|1]]
|}

== Reporting obscenity ==

User "Hal jordan" posted obscenity here. In addition to being blocked, his full IP address and other identifying information have been reported to [http://www.rrsecurity-abuse.com/contactus.html Road Runner] with the request that it take immediate action against him for posting obscenity to a website used by minors under the age of 16.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 12:25, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

A Soft Layer Technologies system in Dallas was the source of a different obscenity by a user. The user has been blocked and the owner of the server has been notified at support@SoftLayer.com .--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:23, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

== Removing users ==
*[[User:Deus rex caelum]]--Is making parody/mocking edits/entries.

: I almost blocked him last night, but thought perhaps it best to give more of an opportunity to be constructive. His edits have not been clear vandalism, though I agree at least one seems silly. Maybe he'll get serious.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:23, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

*[[User:Scalito1776]] - has made numerous vandalizing edits --[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 01:40, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

: REPLY: blocked for infinite duration, and his vandalism has been rolled back. We also have his IP address and ISP.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*[[User:Sisyphus]], [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Microscope&direction=next&oldid=41608 Microscope], prank/parody article: "Microscopes are ''purportedly'' instruments that enable the user to view objects smaller than the eye is capable of visualizing... Microscopes are frequently used by scientists, such as those arguing in favor of human cloning, stem cell research, and evolution... little investigation has been done into the possibility that microscopes may cause the existence of the very microbes they purport to offer us a glimpse at. It is also possible that the scientific method may itself be at fault." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:21, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

: REPLY: blocked for one week for his one edit, which was inappropriate. Good decision here by another SYSOP (Geo). Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:56, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*[[User:Scriabin]] and [[User:Familyman]], for subtle vandalism in their creation of the original articles on [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Johann_Sebastian_Bach&oldid=33939 Johann Sebastian Bach] and [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Bach%2C_johann_sebastian&oldid=40072 Bach, johann sebastian] (now a redirect). They highlight a problem that concerns me: both of these articles, as created, are poisonous mixes of valid information with misinformation that is subtle enough to escape notice by people who don't know the subject, while ludicrous enough to arouse the derision of those who do. [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Johann_Sebastian_Bach&oldid=33939 Johann Sebastian Bach] said that Bach composed "a C Minor Mass." If he did, it's obscure, whereas his '''B''' Minor Mass is celebrated; ''Mozart'' wrote a famous C Minor Mass. That could be a typo. Saying Bach composed ''The Diabelli Variations'' (which are by Beethoven) can't be. The original version of [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Bach%2C_johann_sebastian&oldid=40072 Bach, johann sebastian] goes over the top when it says "The title of his collection Bach's Great Organ Works is attributed, according to legend, to his wife Anna Magdalena Bach upon the delivery of their umpteenth child." OK, maybe not-so-subtle vandalism. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:49, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

:Familyman has been blocked, and upon Dpbsmith's comments above I also blocked Scriabin. But upon further extensive investigation I couldn't find evidence justifying a block of Scriabin, so I have unblocked him. I have an open mind about this and welcome comments by others. I'm particularly reluctant to disagree with Dpbsmith, who has almost always been right here and has been with us since nearly the beginning. Thanks, Dpbsmith!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 10:21, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
::(You're welcome!) [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:20, 17 March 2007 (EDT) P. S. Since it wasn't at all obvious (and still isn't) that Scriabin's edit represented abuse, and since he wasn't making rapid edits, I should have asked him about this on his Talk page instead of going here. I've now done so now. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:35, 18 March 2007 (EDT) Scriabin and I have exchanged mutual apologies. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 08:45, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

I am reporting [[user: Conservative]] He was involved in a dispute with AmesG and then unilaterally decided to ban him for a week, using a power he possessed and AmesG does not. That is a blatant abuse of SysOp authority - the proper course of action would have been to bring in another SysOp as a neutral third party to decide the matter. I am asking that AmesG be re-instated and Conservative be given a warning for his abuse of authority. This kind of ham-handed banning will give this site a bad reputation that will be hard to shake.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 16:43, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

*[[Eric Mukherjee]]. Suspect harmless undergraduate prankster hi-jinks. No sources provided. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 11:43, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
:'''(removed names - these people may not be involved. Unfair to publically name and shame them if they are not)'''--[[User:AustinM|AustinM]] 12:10, 15 March 2007 (EDT) You're right, I shouldn't have done that. Thanks for removing them. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 20:46, 15 March 2007 (EDT)

[[user: JC]] is a suspected vandal. Could some one revert his edits I have done some but I don't thave time right now to search through everything. ([[User:AustinM|AustinM]])

:What is going on?
:[[User:Conservative|Conservative]] gets granted exclusive rights to put the [[creationist]] view on the [[Theory of evolution]] article. [[User:AustinM|AustinM]] banns [[User:JC|JC]] for putting the creationist view on other articles, claiming it is vandalism. [[User:AustinM|AustinM]] then goes and vandalizes the [[Margaret Thatcher]], [[John Major]] and [[Guantanamo Bay detention camp]] articles. Are Conservatives fighting amongst each other in order to decide whose version of reality gets to be the definitive one? Can't wait for the SYSOPs banning SYSOPs melee.
:This site is an endless source of surreal entertainment. I can't really see anyone taking it seriously as an encyclopedia.
:I assume I'll get banned for pointing that out.
:[[User:WhatIsGoingOn|WhatIsGoingOn]] 15:04, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
::Handy jargon: on Wikipedia, this is known as a "wheel war." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:22, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Interesting, I always idly wondered about that term means (and always forgot to look it up), so thanks for the info! --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 19:35, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

===Christianity===
The page has been blocked to prevent editing, which I would normally commend had the content been accurate, except that the existing definition of Christianity is a weak rendition of the actual Biblical revelation. It should not be defined by a Harris poll! If you are to be any better than Wikipedia, you must want truth to be objectively stated. For something as important as one's eternal relationship with God Himself, the information better be accurate!

In Wikipedia, when Christians try to edit, say to some cult's page, the cult members merely come and erase it and edit it out. Truth doesn't matter to the site, and they allow the false claims to continue. That should be different here! Truth is objective, and can be known by anyone, believer or unbeliever in Christianity. Facts are still facts. But we can only write articles to the level of our knowledge. Whoever wrote, wrote what he could, but it can be improved, and should be allowed to be improved.

I would suggest a respected editorial Board for Christian issues. All Christian denominations surprisingly agree on the basics such as are in the Apostle's and Nicene Creeds of the Church. There is one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit; Jesus is fully God and flly man; He died and rose physically from the dead; He offers salvation solely on account of His grace, His works on our behalf, as our Substitute, taking the wrath of God due us. God calls us to repent and believe, and that faith is a "gift, that no man may boast."(Eph.2:8,9). Our salvation is because of the works of Christ alone, and we have this knowledge from inspired Scripture alone, etc.

All three major branches of Christianity, Protestantism, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy would agree that Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian denominations, but rather non-Christian cults or religions. But in order to show the truth of various claims, there must be accuracy in reporting the facts -- objectivity. As it is right now, the definition of Christianity is far too limited.

Who do we talk to in order to submit changes for its editing?
Thank you,

PD Popejoy

:''All three major branches of Christianity, Protestantism, Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy would agree that Mormonism or Jehovah's Witnesses are not Christian denominations, but rather non-Christian cults or religions.''
:They, on the other hand would disagree. Are we going with [[Truth By Headcount]], now? If so, the Christians were Wrong(tm) back when the Roman Empire was using them for lion chow. --[[User:Scrap|Scrap]] 06:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:: I'm not sure where this stands now, and I apologize for being late on this discussion. But I wanted to say this: let's avoid using the word "cult" to describe any group. It seems overly pejorative and not encyclopedic. Thanks.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 19:32, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

*Mr. Schlafly is correct. Too many words are bandied about all over the Net. Jim Jones, of Jonestown--Peoples Temple infamy, he ran a "Cult". So think of him, and his tragedy, before applying that word. Last I checked, neither the JW's or LDS people were telling their people to drink Kool-aid laced with poison, so they could cross over and meet Jesus.

Blocked [[user:JesusSaves]] for three days. Reason for it was in repeated inclusion of a nonsensical line in the article [[Genesis]], and his decision to begin and escalate an argument about it. When given a last warning to stop, he continued. It's documented on the [[Genesis]] talk page. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 20:13, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
:I have to tell you, this is a mirror image of when Conservative blocked AmesG. Karajou, you were involved in a personal dispute with the user and should probably get a fellow sysop to sign off on that.

:From [[Talk:Genesis]] "If you intend to continue this fight, then I'm going to boot you from the site. Last warning. Karajou 19:41, 18 March 2007 (EDT)"

:The fight was with you... get a neutral sysop to go with you... you probably had a case but booting him yourself removes your moral authority. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 20:47, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

:: I reviewed this debate betwen Karajou and JesusSaves at length. While blocking is always a last resort, it is appropriate when someone is repeatedly interfering with productive work. Karajou could have locked the page, but that would have prevented others from contributing to this work-in-progress.

:: JesusSaves should have deferred to the person doing the most work on the entry (Karajou). It's not right for a bystander to come along and repeatedly insist on placing a dot somewhere in the Mona Lisa as Da Vinci paints it. Karajou warned JesusSaves repeatedly, and even then blocked him for only 3 days.

:: Put another way, we don't allow a heckler's veto here. Some professional courtesy and deference is appropriate, and Karajou need not divert his efforts to track down other SYSOPs in this situation. I hope JesusSaves will return and not insist on his same edit yet again.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:16, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Personaly, I did not like the thought of having him, or anyone else for that matter, removed from the site. I think a better preference for myself at least would be to contact another sysop or Aschlafly for arbitration should another incident happen. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 13:16, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

------------------

I responded on your talk page. [[User:MountainDew|MountainDew]] 02:15, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==Current Alerts==
*Dunno about [[Breast Exam]], initial text by [[User:NewGuy2]], image added by [[User:EditGenius2]]. Sincere article about an important and nonsexual topic, or deliberate attempt to push at the borderlines? Image appears to have been copied from http://www.iparenting.com/resources/articles/cancerpregnancy.htm by the way. Image is not obscene in context but I would have thought it was hot stuff when I was thirteen. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:38, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
*[[User:EditGenius2]] also uploaded [:Image:SelfExam.jpg] but no pages link to it. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:47, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
*Seems to be an edit war in progress over the same image at [[Self Breast Exam]]. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 12:52, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
::Could people at least reply on the talk page for the breast exam page for WHY they keep deleting the non offensive image? If that's offensive, then this is going to end up being an amazingly tiny encyclopedia. It doesn't show anything rude, as I said on the talk page, yet it's gone once again. --[[User:ALFa|ALFa]] 14:50, 17 March 2007 (EDT)
:::This is going to be a very tiny encyclopedia. That's sort of the point, unfortunately. --[[User:Scrap|Scrap]] 22:45, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

: Folks, I deleted that stuff about breast exams. Go look in your Encyclopedia Britannica and see if you find voyeurism like that. You won't, and it shouldn't be here either.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:38, 18 March 2007 (EDT)
:: Due respect, Andy, but you will... you will find anatomical pictures of breasts, etc. But then again, in an EB, you'll also not find outright censorship of material on evolution.-[[User:AmesG|AmesG]] 20:58, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

::: The desire by so many (present company excluded) to teach about sex has really been an eye-opener for me. There appear to be millions of people wanting to teach about sex! Virtually none of them become doctors, or even go into health professions. Virtually none want to become real teachers. But it's amazing how many want to be teachers of sex-related topics!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:09, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
::::Woot! Sign me up!--[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 21:12, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

* [[User:Dierwolf]] is blanking pages. [[User:Blozrav]] is copying from wikipedia. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 19:24, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
:Addressed.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 20:56, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

==Long-term tasks==
I made a "short" list of redirects that still exist after the "on wheels" move vandalism. I believe they should be cleaned up... But instead of actually editing fifty redirect pages to include them in the "Speedy Delete" category, I just compiled a list at [[User:Sid 3050/Deletion List]]. I also included the Delete links AND lined them up in a nifty column so you can just click away if you like. (Yes, I've been having far too much fun with regular expression replacements there. I'm weird like that.) =P --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 23:17, 17 March 2007 (EDT)

: Did someone beat me to it? I tried and there was nothing to delete for everything I clicked. Thanks for your superb list!!!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 20:48, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

::Yeah, whatever. MountainDew reacted to the call within minutes, so you should praise him. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 21:24, 18 March 2007 (EDT)

== Hitler article ==
The Hitler article is locked to prevent vandalism, but the most recent changes by [[User:RobS | RobS]] and [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.plrd]] are nothing short of vandalism. --[[User:Order|Order]] 19 March, 14:00 (AEST
:I fail to see how I vandalized this page by adding information. I have unprotected it to allow work. [[User:Geo.plrd|Geo.]] 01:34, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
::It looked like subtle vandalism, by inserting many red herrings and factual erros. Thanks for unprotecting it, although I am not sure where to begin first. The article bebfore the ''improvment drive'' was maybe short, and a bit simplistic, but at least fairly correct.--[[User:Order |Order]] 19 March 20:00 (AEST)

*I posted over there at the Hitler talk page. Let's hope cooler heads will manage the rather simple task of informing users what Hitler was, and what it was he ordered, without getting bogged down in nitpicks and petty arguments. When examining '''true Evil''', and trying to explain it, we simply don't have time for that kind of crap. --[[User:TK|TK]] 06:47, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Debate:Should students learn a foreign language?

2007-03-20T00:09:59Z

Raytrotter:

Would Latin, Greek, Hebrew and Aramaic be considered examples of foreign languages? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:40, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

No, I don't see a real point. I'd rather kids learn German, Arabic, Farsi, Mandarin, or some other useful language in school rather than Italian, Spanish and French. I'd also rather we start teaching kids foreign languages much earlier before English Language patterns are set.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 19:45, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Spanish can be useful down in South-West US, places such as Arizona or New Mexico, so I don't see the problem with it.. But French is such a commonly taught language in North America; how useful is it really? Anyways, I quite agree with what Elamdri states.--[[User:Blzorav|Blozrav]]
:When I say useful, I mean languages that are more sought after in the business and government spheres. Yeah, Spanish can be helpful if you work at McDonalds in New Mexico, but other than that, your limited. German and especially Mandarin are the other two languages of big business besides English. Farsi and Arabic are important languages right now for anyone looking into careers in government, military, and espionage.--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 19:51, 19 March 2007 (EDT)
::You do know that there are countries to the south of the United States right? You do know that these countries represent one of the largest trading blocks to the United States? Just wondering. --[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 20:09, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Ah, okay, I get what you mean. Thanks! --[[User:Blzorav|Blozrav]]

Generally speaking, yes. Being bilingual never hurts. People whose native language is English/American have a sort of choice since it's a very widely-used language. Everybody else should at least learn English as a second language. For the English-speaking people, I'd suggest French, German, or something like that, if just to appreciate how easy English is. ;) Overall, it depends on what you want to do, like Elamdri pointed out. But being able to communicate in a language other than your first one can be a true asset. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 20:04, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

Voter fraud

2007-03-16T21:28:15Z

Raytrotter:

Voter fraud includes voting in the name of people who have died, or moved away, or already voted in the same election in another state, or are otherwise ineligible to vote. Estimates of the amount of voter fraud are as much as a percentage point or more in an election. It can change the outcome of a close election.

But even areas not known for voter fraud have unexplained discrepancies between voter registration lists and estimates of the number of eligible voters. In Indiana, for example, one expert estimated that there were 1.3 million more names on the registration rolls than there were eligible voters in the state. Indiana enacted a law requiring display of a photo ID by most voters prior to voting, Ind. Code 3-5-2-40.5, and the constitutionality of this law was upheld on appeal in ''Crawford v. Marion County Election Board'', 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 110 (7th Cir. Jan. 4, 2007).

Talk:Voter fraud

2007-03-16T21:27:56Z

Raytrotter:

Not sure why you changed my edits. Isn't there a lot of evidence about the democrats carrying out voter fraud? --[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 12:48, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
:Do you have references to back up such a claim? And what about Republican voter fraud? [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 12:50, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
::Then cite it, and cite it extensively. If there's "a lot of evidence" then it shouldn't be hard. The wording is also deeply biased--it's not like Republicans are innocent on the matter. International voter fraud would also be useful. --[[User:John|John]] 12:51, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

OK, well if that is the standard I will remove the Chicago reference since that isn't cited and seems pretty biased. --[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 17:27, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

Talk:Voter fraud

2007-03-16T16:48:12Z

Raytrotter:

Not sure why you changed my edits. Isn't there a lot of evidence about the democrats carrying out voter fraud? --[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 12:48, 16 March 2007 (EDT)

Voter fraud

2007-03-16T16:44:34Z

Raytrotter:

Voter fraud includes voting in the name of people who have died, or moved away, or already voted in the same election in another state, or are otherwise ineligible to vote. Estimates of the amount of voter fraud are as much as a percentage point or more in an election. It can change the outcome of a close election.

Some areas, such as Chicago, Illinois, are notorious for having rampant voter fraud. The greater the power of a political machine, the higher the risk for substantial voter fraud. In fact, the Democrat party has a long history of conducting fraud during elections.

But even areas not known for voter fraud have unexplained discrepancies between voter registration lists and estimates of the number of eligible voters. In Indiana, for example, one expert estimated that there were 1.3 million more names on the registration rolls than there were eligible voters in the state. Indiana enacted a law requiring display of a photo ID by most voters prior to voting, Ind. Code 3-5-2-40.5, and the constitutionality of this law was upheld on appeal in ''Crawford v. Marion County Election Board'', 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 110 (7th Cir. Jan. 4, 2007).

May

2007-03-15T00:18:46Z

Raytrotter:

'''May''' is the fifth [[month]] of the [[year]]. It is after [[April]] and before [[June]]. Mother's Day is in May.

Women

2007-03-15T00:14:40Z

Raytrotter:

According to [[biblical literalism]], women, like Men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]. [[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a rib from [[Adam]], the first Man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a subservient companion for [[Adam]]. Also not explicitly stated in the [[Bible]], it is obvious that, due to the manner in which Eve was created, she was Adam's wife, as God does not intend for two humans in such a union to be any other way.{{fact}} Eve caused sin and suffering to come into the world when she tricked Adam into eating from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to God.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref>

Some woman organizations like the National Organization of Woman disagree with the Bible and argue that they should not have to submit to their husbands, but instead should have "equal" rights.[http://womensvoicesraised.org/bakerLetter.html]

== Menstruation ==

The Bible states that God does not approve of menstruation (Romans 11:376). In Ezekiel, God condemns an action of the Israelites by equating it to a woman's menstrual cycle: "...to Me their way was like the uncleanness of a woman in her customary impurity" (Ezekiel 36:17). In Isaiah, God also likens man's own righteousness to "filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6). The English translation here is actually cleaned up a little, as it more directly translates to "a rag of periods" <ref>[http://www.atruechurch.info/sexduringmenstruation.html Sex During Mentruation]</ref>.

The Bible states that if a man and a woman have sexual intercourse during her menstrual cycle both must be ostracized by their community: "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people." (Leviticus 20:18)

==References==
<references />

Talk:Wikipedia

2007-03-14T23:25:11Z

Raytrotter: /* Mandatory Banning of Homosexual Wikipedia Editors */

==Sources==
If you follow the link to Cecil DeMille's wikipedia entry you'll notice that the trivia section is gone ... you should be careful to use references that are constantly being updated as they might not always prove your point.
Another case of being careful what you quote: here's an article saying 51% believe god created humans, 30% say humans evolved w/ God's help and 15% say we evolved w/o God. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml
Polls aren't generally scientific and as shown by the edits to this entry you can find all sorts of different percentages for who believes what. [[User:Jrssr5|Jrssr5]] 14:04, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

"The wikipedia entry accuses Conservapedia of having its own bias..."
How ridiculous. How would a place called "Conservapedia" POSSIBLY have any sort of "bias"?
(What's the wiki tag for 'sarcasm'?) --[[User:Sandbagger|Sandbagger]] 16:22, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

The poll cited for belief by the US public in evolution needs to be updated. It's almost a decade old. Harris has one from 2005. [http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=581] --[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 18:46, 11 March 2007 (EDT)

Is there a more credible source for that 9% poll link?--[[User:Elamdri|Elamdri]] 01:57, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

The last two bracketed sentences in the first section should be removed as they are not consistent with a formal encyclopaedia entry. If there is not a consensus on this point, at the very least the spelling should be corrected. Also, it seems that as of 12 March 2007, Wikipedia has an article on Conservapedia which makes the second part of this article obsolete. [[User:treeman]] 12:22, 11 March 2007

== "Controversy" ==

This page was unlocked to add ''facts'', not ''alleged bias''. There is an entire article about the alleged bias, it doesn't go in here. The "controversy" section is about bias. Additionally, parts of it apply only to the English Wikipedia, NOTHING is sourced, and the source I consulted right now suggests that the whole "Americans are majority" bit is wrong. Unless there is something incredibly important I'm missing here (say so!), I'll delete the section in a few minutes. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 16:09, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:I'm for deleteing it right now. Anything that can be written here can also be written on the bias article that already exists.[[User:MatteeNeutra|MatteeNeutra]] 16:12, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:: To appease those who insist wikipedia is biased, maybe we should include a link to [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]] in a "see also" section. Otherwise content like this will just keep reapearing and being deleted. [[User:MikeA|MikeA]] 16:14, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Done, and the link had already been added by the time I got there. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 16:22, 12 March 2007 (EDT)

::::There does not seem to be an article on wikiality.com, as a big proponent of truthiness, and gut thinking, I would consider adding this to the UNBIASED conservapedia.

=="A large percentage" of homosexuals==
C'mon. How many? Out of how many?

Wikipedia has [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Statistics 3,834,720 registered user accounts, of which 1,147 (or 0.03%) have administrative privileges], by the way.

And what does it mean to be a "supporter of homosexuality?" Is a company that says it does not discriminate against gays "supporting" homosexuality, for example? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:28, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:" and given by example are [[Sodom]] and Gommorah, who having gone after strange flesh, suffered the vengence of eternal fire. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 13:29, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::Please, ''please'' do not use the story of Sodom and Gommorah as anti-homosexual support, since the story had nothing to do with that. --[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 13:32, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:''Touch not mine annointed, and do my prophets no harm''. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 13:29, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::Have you ever read the story, Dave? The story '''does''' in fact have to do with homosexuality. --[[User:David R|<<-David R->>]] 13:33, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::::I have, extensively. The story is not about homosexuality, but about hospitality. When the mob is described in the KJV, they are "both old and young, all the people from every quarter." The original Hebrew is ''anshei ha'ir, anshei S'dom,'' or ''the people of the city, the people of Sodom''. Which means women and children were present, not a homosexual mob.

::::Further, remember that Lot offered the mob his daughters in exchange. If the men of Sodom were homosexuals, he would have known this and not offered up his daughters to them. He'd have offered up his son-in-law's, which he had the right to do under the customs of the time.

::::But most tellingly are the words of Ezekiel - (Ezek. 16:49-50) "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." Nowhere does it mention homosexuality.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 13:46, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:::So, does that mean that a company that says it does not discriminate against gays "supports" homosexuality? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==What's wrong with using actual numbers?==
I said that

:Of approximately 3 million Wikipedia editors, about 250 of them [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Gay_Wikipedians] have posted on their user pages statements that they identify themselves as "gay."

[[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]], I've given the basis for both of these numbers. If you have better sources for the actual numbers, please cite and use them. If not, don't fall back on weasel words like "some" or "a large percentage." [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:41, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== Bias against homosexuality ==
This article seems to have a very strong bias against homosexuality. The section about "Wikipedia and Homosexuality" is longer than the rest of the article. Furthermore, can anybody tell me why the homosexuality of "Essjay" it is of relevance to this article? --[[User:QuestionMark|QuestionMark]] 13:44, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::It isn't. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:I assume it's the attempt to make Wikipedia look as bad as possible without repeating things from the Bias list. It should also be noted that most of these things most likely only refer to en.wikipedia, but that's not exactly new (see Bias article again) --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 13:50, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::Check the history and the edit comments. It appears that I am a "liberal gay rights activist" because I wanted a source citation for what critics, specifically, talk about Wikipedia as having a "gay cabal," and because I prefer to say "250 Wikipedia editors" rather than "some" or "a large percentage" identify themselves as gay on their user pages. (Incidentally, just for the record... when I checked I counted 226, which I rounded ''up,'' and 3,834,720, which I rounded ''down.'') [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 13:58, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== Please don't revert multiple times ==
:This is directed at user [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] Would you please discuss such enormous changes before simply reverting to your pov? [[User:Menkatron|Menkatron]] 14:00, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::I like your changes. Too many plants here from Wikipedia. [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 14:02, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== "Like conservipedia" ==

"Like Conservapedia, it is a wiki that is written and edited by its users."

Since Conservipedia is pretty much a rip of Wikipedia, is it in any way honest to use wording that would lead one to believe that conservipedia is a more established wiki than wikipedia? [[User:Opcn|Opcn]] 14:54, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==RightWolf2, please back up your statements==
Being Conservapedia doesn't mean that any opinion can be stated just because it's conservative.

With regard to:
:Conservative critics of Wikipedia have commented the site appears to be dominated and misused by the homosexual movement as a propaganda vehicle for promoting homosexuality.
well, fine, but please cite a source so that any reader can judge for themselves what they think about these "critics," and see whether you've summarized their views fairly.

With regard to:
:The Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community
I personally have no idea how one would even ''begin'' to go about finding such a thing. Please give a basis for this statement. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:20, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

I'd leave him be, this article is hilarious! [[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 16:27, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:RightWolf2, you gave http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ as a citation to back up the statement that "The Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community." However, that link goes to a page that contains neither the word "homosexual" nor the word "gay." Please provide a '''specific''' link to the page supporting the statement. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:36, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::This may be the cite he was refering to. http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/hivemind.html [[User:RobS|RobS]] 17:12, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==OK, it is pretty funny==
RightWolf2, your latest edit gives the impression that you are counting "Heterosexual Wikipedians," "Male Wikipedians" and "Female Wikipedians" as homosexuals. (The cited source is [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedians_by_sexuality]). [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:47, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

==Secret Revelations==
:I am a top-level administrator on one of the several non-English versions of Wikipedia. I can confirm that your concerns on severe liberal bias are indeed correct, as they have dogged Wikipedia from the very beginning of the project.

:As a conservative, it felt that it was tougher in getting an admin position. As such, I have dedicated over 80 000 edits in removing all forms of bias against Western and Eastern civilization. Also, I made it easier for people to get to know christianity.

:Several left-wing associations seem to influence on the organization of Wikipedia. Groups of freeware developers, members of the rationalist zetetique, libertarians in general, European socialists and American democrats, even anarchists, communists and freemasons seem to have a greater hold than the average conservative editor.

:To deliver us from the utter control of sects, I am very pleased that you have begun the Conservapedia project. My prayer goes out to your very best success. [[User:Knight|Knight]]

== Dpbsmith ==

This page is very interesting.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Dpbsmith Wikipedia Page for this user]

[[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 17:01, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:This editors comments in this article are also interesting. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia Conservapedia] [[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 17:03, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:In response to the change from editor to user, I support using the term "editor." If I look up something on wikipedia, I use it. If I edit something on wikipedia, while I am using, more specifically, I'm editing it. But that's just my two cents. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 18:23, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Well, I decided the most accurate language is "people who have registered Wikipedia user accounts." I just changed it to "Of the people who have registered Wikipedia user accounts, 226 (as of 14th March 2007) users have chosen to place a marker on their user page identifying them as homosexual." Before anyone jumps on top of me, notice that I removed the percentage calculation, which I think is silly, and put the total number of such accounts into the footnote. Here's [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Wikipedia&diff=36275&oldid=36173 the diff] in case anybody gets confused about who changed what. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:48, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
::::How about, "226 have outed themselves". [[User:RobS|RobS]] 18:57, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::Instead of "have chosen to place a marker on their user page identifying them as homosexual?" Sounds like an improvement to me. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 19:23, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::Meanwhile... with regard to the statement that
:::"The Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community based upon materials posted to Wikipedia Watch,"
::I still would like to know where this material is posted, since the linked page does not contain it. Or should the statement read something like this:
:::"The Mediation Committee, Arbitration Committee, and number of site adminitrators contain a disproportionate number of homosexual members in comparison to demographic percentages within the Wikipedia Community, according to comments made in IRC chat groups on the Wikipedia Watch website"
::::[[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 18:37, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::Nice, I like the change in language. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 18:55, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

== Mandatory Banning of Homosexual Wikipedia Editors ==

I would propose a mandatory ban of any Wikipedia editors who edit this site and have placed themselves in the homosexual category as these editors are inconsistent with Conservapedia's goals. Allowing them to edit here will bring this project under God's righteous wrath and doom it to failure. I will start a page on suspected homosexual editors infiltrating this site from Wikipedia. They should be banned on sight.

They should be identified and purged, along with all of their edits.

''put away the unrighteous from among thee, for neither liars, nor murderers not fornicators, nor adulterers, nor sodomites shall inherit the kingdom of God, for without are dogs (homosexuals).''

-- from the bible

[[User:RightWolf2|RightWolf2]] 19:20, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
: Is this one of those liberal parodies that is occasionally pointed to? --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 19:22, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

::Maybe we can put pink triangles on their user page while we're at it...God forbid someone out of the mainstream have a POV...--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 19:24, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

I think these are good ideas. It is nice ot have a place on the web not beng infiltrated by the homos**ual agenda.--[[User:Raytrotter|Raytrotter]] 19:25, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Women

2007-03-14T22:41:56Z

Raytrotter:

According to [[biblical literalism]], women, like Men, were created by God on the 6th day of [[Creation]], as told in The Book of [[Genesis]]. [[Genesis]] further elaborates that [[God]] took a rib from [[Adam]], the first Man, and from it created [[Eve]], the first woman, as a subservient companion for [[Adam]]. Also not explicitly stated in the [[Bible]], it is obvious that, due to the manner in which Eve was created, she was Adam's wife, as God does not intend for two humans in such a union to be any other way. Eve causes sin and suffering to come into the world when she tricks Adam into eating from The Tree of Knowledge, an act directly forbidden by God Himself. Saint Paul also has much to say on the status of women in society, most memorably that women should submit to their husbands just as the church submits to God.
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=ephesians%205:22-24&version=9 Ephesians 5:22-24 ]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:8-9;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:8-9]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2011:4-7;&version=9; I Corinthians 11:4-7]</ref>
<ref>[http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=I%20Corinthians%2014:34-35;&version=9; I Corinthians 14:34-35]</ref>

Some woman organizations like the National Organization of Woman disagree with the Bible and argue that they should not have to submit to their husbands, but instead should have "equal" rights.

== Menstruation ==

The Bible states that God does not approve of menstruation (Romans 11:376). In Ezekiel, God condemns an action of the Israelites by equating it to a woman's menstrual cycle: "...to Me their way was like the uncleanness of a woman in her customary impurity" (Ezekiel 36:17). In Isaiah, God also likens man's own righteousness to "filthy rags" (Isaiah 64:6). The English translation here is actually cleaned up a little, as it more directly translates to "a rag of periods" <ref>[http://www.atruechurch.info/sexduringmenstruation.html Sex During Mentruation]</ref>.

The Bible states that if a man and a woman have sexual intercourse during her menstrual cycle both must be ostracized by their community: "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has exposed her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from their people." (Leviticus 20:18)

==References==
<references />

Talk:French Revolution

2007-03-14T21:25:24Z

Raytrotter:

The first paragraph of this article is bizarre. The most famous? Most everyone was killed by the guillotine?

French Revolution

2007-03-14T21:21:28Z

Raytrotter:

The French Revolution is the most famous revolution in all of history--even more famous than the American, Russian, Iranian, Chinese, or Nicaraguan revolutions. It started out with hope and promise, but ended with nearly everyone being executed by the [[Guillotine]]. Then there was a "Reign of Terror", terrifying chaos when anyone and everyone could be killed at any time.

Before the Revolution, France had three levels in its social system: The First, Second, and Third Estates. The [[First Estate]] was about 1% of the population, but it controlled 10% of the land. The First Estate consisted of the clergy, and they did not pay any taxes. The [[Second Estate]] was about 2% of the population and they controlled 20% of the land. These were the nobility, and they too payed very little taxes. The [[Third Estate]] was everyone else, and they were badly overtaxed by the monarch. This overtaxing was a major cause of the French Revolution. Interestingly, taxes also helped to spark the [[American Revolution]].

The leaders of the Third Estate were the middle class, called the [[bourgeoisie]]. They were educated in the ideas of the [[Enlightenment]], most importantly [[Jean Jacques Rousseau]]. Rousseau's book, "The Social Contract" supported a [[direct democracy]], rather that the republican government that had been adopted in [[America]]. The social contract spoke against titles for nobility and demanded complete equality for all people. These ideas later inspired communist writers like [[Karl Marx]].

France was near bankruptcy in 1789 due to King Louis XVI’s extravagance and high taxes, which discouraged work. The Second Estate then made a big mistake in demanding a meeting of the Estates-General, which was a French Assembly that had not met in 175 years. The defect in this strategy was that each Estate had one vote in the Assembly, such that the First and Second Estates could always outvote the Third Estate. That was acceptable in the early 1600s, but the Third Estate would not allow this in 1789 after learning the Enlightenment ideas. They wanted a system of one vote per delegate, which would have given the Third Estate the same number of votes as the First and Second Estate combined.

When the First and Second Estates refused this request by the Third Estate, it left and formed a new National Assembly. When the Third Estate was locked out of its meeting place, it met on tennis court and took the “Tennis Court Oath” to draft a new French constitution.

Violence soon hit the streets. On July 14, 1789 (“[[Bastille Day]]”), French peasants stormed the large Paris prison known as Bastille, freeing the inmates. The Great Fear or panic resulted, as riots occurred and peasants proceeded to burn wealthy homes. [[Louis XVI]] and his wife, [[Marie Antoinette]], were forced from their home in Versailles by a riot of women over the high price of bread. Supposedly the snobby Antoinette responded unsympathetically to the lack of bread for the peasants by declaring, “Let them eat cake!” Historians doubt she ever actually said that.

By then the French Revolution was in full swing. The National Assembly approved the “[[Declaration of the Rights of Man]],” which combined ideas of the American Declaration of Independence with some Enlightenment concepts. The result of this combination had many debatable claims. The entire document is short and worth reading in full: http://www.hrcr.org/docs/frenchdec.html

Unlike the American declaration that “all men are created equal,” the French version declared that “Men are born and remain free and equal in rights. Social distinctions may be founded only upon the general good.” Unlike the American declaration that all men have inalienable rights of “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” the French version declared that all men have natural rights of “liberty, property, security and resistance to oppression.” Some of the French declarations seem silly, like this one: “Every citizen may, accordingly, speak, write, and print with freedom, but shall be responsible for such abuses of this freedom as shall be defined by law.” What is the meaning of a freedom if it is arbitrarily limited by undefined “abuses of this freedom”?

In 1791, a French journalist named [[Olympe de Gouges]] proposed a “[[Declaration of the Rights of Woman]],” but the National Assembly rejected her proposal. She, like many other leaders of that time, was eventually executed by guillotine.

The French National Assembly established a [[constitutional monarchy]] and, in 1791, adopted a new constitution that created a Legislative Assembly. Three factions quickly formed in the new Legislative Assembly, known as the radicals (liberals), moderates (centrists) and conservatives, similar to those political movements today in the United States. The three factions sat in different sections of the large assembly hall, with the radicals (liberals) sitting on the left, the moderates sitting in the center, and the conservatives sitting on the right. That gave rise to the left-center-right terminology that we still use today in the United States to describe these three political groups.

Meanwhile, Prussia and Austria were at war with one another, and Prussia offered to help the French King Louis XVI and his royal family. In response, in August 1792, the French revolutionaries imprisoned the king and his family.

A new National Convention replaced the Legislative Assembly and abolished the monarchy in order to establish a republic in 1792, which gave all adult males the right to vote. A radical political group called the Jacobins gained power, led by Georges Danton and Jean Paul Marat. Under the influence of the Jacobins, the National Convention used the guillotine to execute Louis XVI in January 1793. By this time many countries, including Great Britain, Spain, the Netherlands, Prussia and Austria, had formed a First Coalition to prevent the violence in France from spreading outside. The National Convention responded by drafting people into an army. Historians claim women were drafted, but such a politically inspired claim is worth investigating before accepting it.

The execution of Louis XVI led almost immediately to the Reign of Terror. [[Maximilian Robespierre]], head of the Committee of Public Safety, proceeded to guillotine numerous alleged enemies, including Marie Antoinette. In a classic illustration of Jesus’s teaching that “he who lives by the sword dies by the sword,” Jacobin leaders [[Georges Danton]] (a fiery orator) was guillotined, and [[Jean-Paul Marat]] (a scientist) was stabbed to death in his bathtub. Eventually Robespierre himself was guillotined in 1794, and the Reign of Terror ended with his death.

At last the government of France was in the hands of a legislature, and an executive branch of five men called the Directory. The Directory picked a young, highly successful military genius named [[Napoleon]] to lead the French army. The very next day Napoleon seized all power in France as its dictator, in November 1799.

The influence of the French Revolution was immense throughout the western hemisphere, as other peoples felt that they, too, could rise up against their rulers and defeat them. Historians credit the French Revolution with spreading the ideas of the Enlightenment, limiting the power of nobility and clergy, and ending an absolute monarchy. But many who supported the French Revolution in its beginning were horrified by where it led, including numerous executions and terror. Some would say that France never fully recovered, as the French Revolution unleashed an hostility towards Christianity that continues to this day in France. Islam has recently risen in power there.

Chile

2007-03-14T21:14:36Z

Raytrotter:

'''Chile''' is a country in the Southern Cone of South America, which borders Argentina, Bolivia, and Peru.

==History of Chile==

Chile was originally inhabited by Native Americans, primarily of the Mapuche tribe.. During the Spanish conquest of South America, racial intermarriage produced the now-dominant "mestizo" ethnicity. Most Chileans are of mixed racial backgrounds.

Chile gained its independence from Spain in 1810 (1ra. JUNTA NACIONAL DE GOBIERNO).

From 1970 to 1973, Chile's leader was Salvador Allende, a democratically-elected populist. In 1973, General Augusto Pinochet Ugarte, better known as [[General Pinochet]], gained power in a military coup, during which Allende committed suicide. The coup is alleged to have been supported by the CIA. Pinochet instituted free market reforms and opposed communism, but also directed [[the Operation Condor]], a reprisal against political opponents during which thousands of Chileans disappeared, have been tortured and killed. Moreover he restricted freedom of press, of expression, etc., by the establishment of a despotic and militarian power.

After Pinochet's ouster in 1990, after he lost a plebesiete election on his continuing status as president, Chile has attempted to try him for war crimes committed under his regime, but trails were postponed due to his age. Pinochet died in 2006, due to heart failure.

Chile's current president, Michelle Bachellet, is the first woman president of the country. She is also a member of the Chilean Socialist party.

Marco Polo

2007-03-14T21:01:41Z

Raytrotter:

1254-1346 A Venitian trader and explorer; one of the first westerners to travel to China on the [[Silk Road]].

A fun childrens game is called Marco Polo and is played in a swimming pool. One kid closes his eyes and yells "Marco" and the rest yell "Polo" the child with his eyes closed has to try to tag one of the other children.

{{stub}}

[[Category:Biographies]]

Talk:Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:42:03Z

Raytrotter:

How about we try to keep this article on information directly related to nuclear weapons? Put the stuff on Iran possibly having a nuke on the Iran page or the Iraq war page, unless you put up a list of all the countries that have the them. -gasmonkey

Need citation for list, and a complete and accurate list. Facts, not conjecture.

OK. Thakns.

That list wasn't accurate? Who else has nuclear bombs? Why don't you add them instead of deleting? -ray
:The countries may have nuclear weapons, not necessarily nuclear bombs though. Furthermore, there is no proof that North Korea has usable nuclear weapons. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 16:17, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

What is the differense between nuclear bombs and nuclear weapons? Didn't North Korea test them?
:Nuclear bombs are just that. Bombs. Nuclear weapons can include missiles, bombs, etc. North Korea claimed to have tested a nuclear weapon, but the results measured under 1 kiloton, thus it's highly doubted that North Korea possesses working nuclear weapons. [[User:ColinR|ColinR]] 16:23, 14 March 2007 (EDT)

Ummm. Wouldn't it be the opposite then that many countries have nuclear bombs but fewer have nuclear weapons? And what country has a nuclear bomb, but not a nuclear weapons. I am confused.
:You can't have a nuclear bomb without having a nuclear weapon. A bomb is a weapon. Thus a nuclear bomb is a nuclear weapon. I never said a country could have a nuclear bomb but not a nuclear weapon. That is logically impossible.

OK, I am still confused. But that is o.k. you are obviously the expert.

Talk:Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:24:58Z

Raytrotter:

Talk:Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:19:21Z

Raytrotter:

Bill O'Reilly

2007-03-14T20:16:12Z

Raytrotter:

Bill O'Reilly is a [[conservative]] [[pundit]] and host of the show ''[[The O'Reilly Factor]]'' on the [[Fox network]], which he calls the No Spin Zone. He exposes leftist lies for his viewers every night. He has expressed he may lend credence to the theory of a human-created global warming phenomenon, and supports civil unions for both heterosexual and homosexual couples. On Comedy Central's ''The Colbert Report'', Stephen Colbert plays an over-the-top parody of the conservative pundits archetyped by O'Reilly.

Talk:Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:14:42Z

Raytrotter:

Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:07:30Z

Raytrotter:

A nuclear bomb is a bomb with a nuclear component, that causes an uncontrolled fission reaction releasing massive amounts of thermal and radioactive energy. Nulear weapons come are capable of massive destruction due to the combined effects of the thermal radiation and blast wave created by the detonation. Radiation is actually a by-product of the weapon, not the primary destrutive force.

The country's with nuclear bombs are the United States, China, Russia, North Korea, India and Pakistan. There is fear that Iran wants a nuclear weapon, too.

Talk:Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T20:06:18Z

Raytrotter:

Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T19:57:43Z

Raytrotter:

A nuclear bomb is a bomb with a nuclear component, that causes an uncontrolled fission reaction releasing massive amounts of thermal and radioactive energy. Nulear weapons come are capable of massive destruction due to the combined effects of the thermal radiation and blast wave created by the detonation. Radiation is actually a by-product of the weapon, not the primary destrutive force.

There is a fear that countries like Iran will get a nuclear bomb like North Korea has done. One of the reasons the United States went to war against Iraq was because of their suspicion of a nuclear weapon program.

San Francisco

2007-03-14T19:50:35Z

Raytrotter:

'''San Francisco''' is a [[liberal]] city in [[California]] and is generally considered one of the most beautiful cities in the world. It has a higher proportion of [[homosexual]]s than any other city in the [[United States]]{{Fact|date=March 2007}}, and in 2004, its mayor, [[Gavin Newsom]], attempted to perform [[same-sex marriage]]s despite the practice being explicitly illegal under California law. Not surprisingly, the marriages were nullified by the courts shortly thereafter.

San Francisco is known for its computer industry and despite its liberalism has been one of the most economically strong cities of the last twenty years.

Famous San Francisco landmarks include the [[Golden Gate Bridge]] and [[Alcatraz Island]].

Nuclear weapon

2007-03-14T19:44:19Z

Raytrotter:

A nuclear bomb is a bomb with a nuclear component, that causes radiation fallout when it explodes.

There is fear that the terrorist state Iran will get a nuclear weapon and use it against the United States. The United States went to war against Iraq in 2003 to stop their nuclear weapons program.

Foot-binding

2007-03-14T19:34:12Z

Raytrotter:

A chinese practice of binding the feet of female babies to prevent them from growing. This is because in Chinese culture small women are considered more desireable.

Soup

2007-03-14T19:19:49Z

Raytrotter:

Soup is a nutritious food that basically consists of broth, meat, vegetables, and maybe noodls. Not all have to be present for something to be considered a soup, but generally broth is necessary. Popular soups are chicken noodle, tomatoe, and minestrone. Most cultures have some kind of soup dish. Soup is often eat during cold weather and chicken soup is considered to have special healing effects when one has a cold. A popular series of Christian books is called Chicken Soup for the Soul.

Francisco Franco

2007-03-14T18:51:36Z

Raytrotter:

Francisco Franco was the [[fascist]] Head of State of Spain from April 1, 1939 – November 20, 1975. He also held the position of Prime Minister of Spain from January 30, 1938 – June 8, 1973.

Franco gained power through an attempted military coup d'etat in 1936 that developed quickly into the [[Spanish Civil War]]. Franco's Falangists fought the elected republican government for three years before finally defeating the Republicans outside Madrid on April 1, 1939. With the fall of Madrid, Franco assumed control of Spain.

Franco ruled Spain as a dictator for many years, under his rule many thousands of political executions took place. Excluding combatants, the death toll under Franco's rule topped 100,000 and maybe approached 200,000 <ref> Beevor, A (2006). ''The Battle for Spain'', Weidenfeld & Nicolson. </ref>
==Reference==

<references/>

Utah

2007-03-14T18:44:39Z

Raytrotter:

The forty-fifth state to enter into the union. The majority of people in Utah are [[Mormons]].

{{stub2}}

[[Category:US state]]

Apartheid

2007-03-14T18:41:54Z

Raytrotter:

Apartheid is a social and political policy of racial segregation and discrimination enforced by white minority governments in South Africa from 1948 to 1994.

[[Nelson Mandela]] was jailed because he was against apartheid even though later he became president.

John Lackland

2007-03-14T18:38:35Z

Raytrotter:

{{stub}}
John Lackland was the son of [[Henry II]] and the brother of [[Richard Plantagenet|Richard the Lionheart]]. He lived from December 24, 1166 to October 18, 1216. John succeeded his brother to the throne and proved to be a lazy, selfish and tyrannical ruler. It is said that during his fits of temper, he would roll on the floor, chewing on the legs of tables, rugs, or anything else in sight.

His oppression finally drove his knights and barons to take him prisoner and force him to sign the [[Magna Carta]].This document limited the power of the king and established the English Parliament. One of its most important statements was that the king was under the law. John believed that he was the law.

John Lackland was the inspiration for Prince John in the Robin Hood stories.

[[Category:Biographies]]

Hell

2007-03-14T18:36:52Z

Raytrotter:

The modern word '''Hell''' for Christians refers to the place meant by the [[Hebrew]] "sheol", but is also mentioned in Joshua 15:8 of the Christian Bible using the word Gehenna, which originally referred to a garbage dump outside the walls of Jerusalem where fires were kept burning to consume the refuse and keep down the stench. Hell is a Christian afterlife where the wicked are punished eternally for all the [[sin]]s they perpetrated during their lifetime on Earth. According to Christians, the only way to avoid hell is to know, love, and serve the Lord.

According to Christian tradition, hell is extremely hot and filled with fire and [[brimstone]].

Bosporus Strait

2007-03-14T18:29:11Z

Raytrotter:

The [[strait]] that unites the [[Black Sea]] and the [[Sea of Marmara]] and separates parts of Asian [[Turkey]] (Anatolia) from European Turkey. It is strategically important because it is how [[Russia]] (the Former [[Soviet Union]]) has access to the [[Mediterranean Sea]].