Difference between revisions of "User talk:RobSmith"
m |
(→Black Lives Matter / Stacey Abrams / Noah Green: new section) |
||
| Line 164: | Line 164: | ||
I hope this helps. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:48, 31 March 2021 (EDT) | I hope this helps. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] ([[User talk:Conservative|talk]]) 12:48, 31 March 2021 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Black Lives Matter / Stacey Abrams / Noah Green == | ||
| + | |||
| + | What was the idea of undoing [https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Black_Lives_Matter&curid=138053&diff=1741707&oldid=1741699 my edits] in the [[Black Lives Matter]] article, which I intended to clean up part of the article (including replacing liberal-preferred terms with more appropriate ones) and add info? Also regarding [https://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Stacey_Abrams&curid=152713&diff=1741677&oldid=1717133 the edit you pointed out] in the Stacey Abrams article, I didn't miss it because it was accurate and sourced and it didn't need to be dealt with. In the [[Noah Green]] article, I also replaced the New York Times and Mediaite links with one from TGP because [[Conservapedia:Editing article and talk pages#Partisanship of Sources|per CP's guidelines, liberal news sources (such as the NYT and Mediaite) are not trustworthy due to their partisan bias and penchant for blatantly lying to suit the liberal narrative]]. Are you just trying to stir up trouble again because I'm actually trying to get articles cleaned up? [[User:Northwest|Northwest]] ([[User talk:Northwest|talk]]) 03:10, 3 April 2021 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 07:10, April 3, 2021
February 3, 2020 - September 30, 2020 - 145,228 page impressions per day.
November 3, 2020 - Election day.
- hypestat: 33K visitors and 206,000 page impressions per day.
November 23, 2020 - DDoS attack
December 29, 2020 - started keeping records in Slack. Country Alexa Rank United States #63,303
- hypestat: 27.1K visitors and 67,786 page impressions per day.
January 2021 - Similiarweb data [1] United States #31,638
February 1, 2021 - throughout Capitol riot and impeachment. United States #33,508
February 3, 2021 - Rob's de-sysoping.
February 11, 2021
- hypestat: 24.7K daily visitors Daily Pageviews 61,624.
February 13, 2021 - Last Google cache until March 25, 2021
February 15, 2021 United States #36,617
February 16, 2021
- hypestat: 23.7K visitors and 56,793 page impressions per day.
February 17, 2021 United States #40,319
February 19, 2021 United States #45,529
February 23, 2021 United States #50,091
February 24, 2021 United States #58,914
February 28, 2021 United States #61,140
March 1, 2021 United States #72,355
March 2, 2021 United States #81,250
March 3, 2021 United States #87,177
March 4, 2021 United States #94,183
- hypestat: 21.2K visitors and 52,997 page impressions per day
March 5, 2021
- hypestat: 20.7K visitors and 51,764 page impressions per day
March 6, 2021 United States #99,248
March 7, 2021 United States #109,993
- #158,631 In global internet traffic and engagement over the past 90 days
March 8, 2021 United States #120,617
March 30, 2021
- hypestat: 20.7K visitors and 49,694 page impressions per day
- 2.4 Daily Pageviews per Visitor
- 2:27 Daily Time on Site
- Traffic Sources Past 30 Days 24% Search
April 2, 2021
- 2.3 Daily Pageviews per Visitor
- 2:24 Daily Time on Site
Hey, Rob.
Where can I find the inactive template? --Yeschayoise the editor (talk) 20:40, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- Copy paste it from here. [2] Incidentally, I reviewed both your stub about the Welsh guy and the WP article, and didn't see any "copying" from Wikipedia. RobSFree Kyle!
- Unless of course you call reporting historical facts "copying". RobSFree Kyle! 21:03, 4 March 2021 (EST)
Another question.
Have you ever heard of everipedia? --Builder (talk) 21:11, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- Sounds vaguely familiar. What is it? RobSFree Kyle! 21:13, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- It’s similar to Wikipedia. It basically ported Wikipedia’s articles over. --Builder (talk) 21:14, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- Sounds interesting They're ranked 26,000 globally and 8,000 domestically. [3] They eventually are concerned about their rank, competitiveness, and readership. RobSFree Kyle! 21:31, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- Does this article look bad for a start? https://conservapedia.com/Battle_of_Stamford_Bridge
- No. It doesn't look anymore copied from Wikipedia any more than Conservapedia copied the idea of a source of knowledge from Wikipedia. RobSFree Kyle! 22:02, 4 March 2021 (EST)
- So much for quitting eh Rob?--Mercian12 (talk) 19:44, 12 March 2021 (EST)
- I'm looking for a few doggie biscuits. RobSFree Kyle! 19:47, 12 March 2021 (EST)
- Does this article look bad for a start? https://conservapedia.com/Battle_of_Stamford_Bridge
- Sounds interesting They're ranked 26,000 globally and 8,000 domestically. [3] They eventually are concerned about their rank, competitiveness, and readership. RobSFree Kyle! 21:31, 4 March 2021 (EST)
Greetings RobS, how are you doing?
Hello, Rob. I'm back. Hope you've been well. Thanks for all your efforts and hard work in making Conservapedia the great place that it is. I wonder if you've seen the recent Gordon Cromwell Report on the Status of Global Christianity 2021? I'm praying and working for Global Christianity to reach 3 Billion Souls - wow, how pleasing that would be to the Lord Jesus - by 2030. Please work with me and may all Christians unite for Christendom's sake!
In Our Lord Jesus, Nishant X. God Bless.
- Thank you. Good to see you. Hope you've been well. Did you know that 20% of all CP traffic right now is coming from India? Your timing of a comeback couldn't have been better. RobSFree Kyle! 23:57, 21 March 2021 (EDT)
- Welcome back NishantXavier! —
LTMay D.C., his mother, and I.S. be all well! Monday, 00:06, 22 March 2021 (EDT)
Great to know, Rob! India is going to rise to internet prominence in the next decade, with an estimated 1 billion internet users by 2025! https://www.analyticsinsight.net/india-estimated-to-reach-1-billion-internet-users-by-2025/ Thanks for all your great efforts in promoting Conservapedia! Together, we can reach the world, your country, the great USA, my country, my beloved India, for the Gospel, and the Conservative Cause!
I pray Our Lord Jesus will richly bless you and reward you for your good efforts in contributing to the Cause, in this life and the next. God Bless.
Edit: Thanks, LT. You're the reason I returned. Thanks for emailing me to remind me. Thanks for all your great work in promoting Conservapedia too!NishantXavierFor Christ the King 00:09, 22 March 2021 (EDT)
Hi Rob. Please see if you can contribute to this article: https://conservapedia.com/Debate:_Will_Christianity_reach_3_billion_adherents_by_2030 NishantXavierFor Christ the King 04:35, 26 March 2021 (EDT)
My update to the civility guideliness
Andy approved my addition to the civility portion of the Conservapedia guidelines.Conservative (talk) 11:33, 29 March 2021 (EDT)
- This is the update I created: "For content disputes, be reasonable and make every effort to use an article's talk page to have a cordial and constructive dialogue. Stick to the facts in content disputes and back up your facts with a source or sources. If you are proposing alternative content in a content dispute, it must be sourced. Do not engage in personal attacks. Avoid bringing up irrelevant past disputes with editors and stick to the content dispute at hand. If you have a content dispute with another editor, do not immediately post to the other editor's personal talk page. The article talk pages is where the vast majority of discussion should take place. Avoid unnecessary content disputes by sourcing your article content."Conservative (talk) 11:34, 29 March 2021 (EDT)
RobS and Northwest content disputes involving historical matters
I see a lot of disputes between RobS and NorthWest involving historical disputes. Below I give some great rules of weighing historical evidence.
"Fischer, David Hackett, Historians’ Fallacies: Toward a Logic of Historical Thought (New York: Harper Collins, 1970). In only approximately 300 pages, Fischer surveys an immense amount of background historical literature to point out a comprehensive variety of analytical errors that many, if not most, historians commit. Fischer points out specific examples of faulty or sloppy reasoning in the work of even the most prominent historians, making it a useful book for beginning students of history. While this book presumably did not make Fischer popular with many of his peers, it should be noted that his contributions as a historian have not been limited simply to criticizing the work of others; since 1976, he has published a number of well-received books on other historical topics."[4]
Fischer's 7 habits of sound historiography
Fischer's 7 rules for historians taken from Josh McDowell's book The New Evidence that Demands a Verdict:
(1) The burden of proof for a historical claim is always upon the one making the assertion.
(2) Historical evidence must be an answer to the question asked and not to any other question.
(3) "An historian must not merely provide good evidence, but the best evidence. And the best evidence, all other things being equal, is the evidence which is most nearly immediate to the event itself."
(4) Evidence must always be affirmative. Negative evidence is no evidence at all. In other words, Fischer is saying that an absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence.
(5) The meaning of any historical evidence is dependent upon the context from which it is obtained from.
(6) "An empirical statement must not be more precise than its evidence warrants."
(7) "All inferences from historical evidence are probabilistic."
Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict, page 674, 1999, Mark MCGarry, Texas Type and Book Works, Dallas, TX, ISBN 0-7852-4219-8)
Fischer's 6 principles of question framing for historical investigations
- Fischer's 6 principles of question framing Conservative (talk) 11:11, 9 May 2019 (EDT)
I hope this helps. Conservative (talk) 12:48, 31 March 2021 (EDT)
Black Lives Matter / Stacey Abrams / Noah Green
What was the idea of undoing my edits in the Black Lives Matter article, which I intended to clean up part of the article (including replacing liberal-preferred terms with more appropriate ones) and add info? Also regarding the edit you pointed out in the Stacey Abrams article, I didn't miss it because it was accurate and sourced and it didn't need to be dealt with. In the Noah Green article, I also replaced the New York Times and Mediaite links with one from TGP because per CP's guidelines, liberal news sources (such as the NYT and Mediaite) are not trustworthy due to their partisan bias and penchant for blatantly lying to suit the liberal narrative. Are you just trying to stir up trouble again because I'm actually trying to get articles cleaned up? Northwest (talk) 03:10, 3 April 2021 (EDT)
