• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Invitation to the new wiki

Diamond

Illuminator
D
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
4,729
The wiki has moved to a new server, and become independent, liberated and single after divorcing the JREF after a short relationship.

Wiki can now be found at http://www.skepticwiki.org/wiki

Although the name has changed, there are still references to the JREF, but with your help, the wiki can wash that JREF right out of her hair! (singing R-E-S-P-E-C-T is a little annoying though)

if you've never registered before, you can now create your own account and start wiki-ing without the intervention or interference of the SysOps.

If you have registered before, you will find your User ID and password to be the same.

You are all invited to do your skeptic duty. Try to write in a consistent style and tone, use the templates if available and use a spelling checker!
 
Fantastic! Though I'm nowhere near as knowlegable as most of the members here or that were already contributing to the wiki, I wanted to be able to help in my own small way: misspellings, questionable grammar, and internal links (without making the damned thing unreadable). As soon as I wan introduced to the wiki concept I kept thinking to myself that a skeptic wiki was in dire need of creation. WOO!
 
FreakBoy said:
Fantastic! Though I'm nowhere near as knowlegable as most of the members here or that were already contributing to the wiki, I wanted to be able to help in my own small way: misspellings, questionable grammar, and internal links (without making the damned thing unreadable).
Click to expand...

I'm editing it so you should have plently to do on that front.
 
We have two full time editors totally focussed on geni's output. We need another one for the rest of the wiki.
 
The dangerous lunatics of MotheringDotCommune have more or less made a special request to have the wiki on the anti-vax brigade expanded to full length. Perhaps someone with more facts at their fingertips than me could give it a go.

//www.mothering.com/discussions/showthread.php?t=351231&highlight=wikipedia
 
Last edited:
I'll tell you they don't want facts. They figure they already have them. I heard they are warning each other that the JREF Wiki is actually an invitation to simple mudflinging...not a point of reference.
 
Eos of the Eons said:
I'll tell you they don't want facts. They figure they already have them. I heard they are warning each other that the JREF Wiki is actually an invitation to simple mudflinging...not a point of reference.
Click to expand...

That maybe true, but the wiki is still a bit short of content at the moment.
 
Let them come to the wiki and face the power of the Skeptic side of the Force..
 
Thing is, there is nothing in the vaccination postings on the wiki to indicate an invitation to mud slinging. I'm getting labelled as inviting dissent for simply posting how vaccines work. What is going to happen when we get to Wakefield, McBean, and others?

Even Beth here has accused me of being biased for posting on McBean, although I posted plenty of proof on why McBean's anti-vaccination claims are completely baseless. This was not my opinion, but a conclusion based on what I found in McBean's own contentions vs what I could dig up as facts to compare it to.

How do I get past all this and feel that my entries are not biased, not an invitation to simply make others mad, and an actual representation of the facts?


Love the avatar Diamond ;)
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Thing is, there is nothing in the vaccination postings on the wiki to indicate an invitation to mud slinging. I'm getting labelled as inviting dissent for simply posting how vaccines work. What is going to happen when we get to Wakefield, McBean, and others?

Even Beth here has accused me of being biased for posting on McBean, although I posted plenty of proof on why McBean's anti-vaccination claims are completely baseless. This was not my opinion, but a conclusion based on what I found in McBean's own contentions vs what I could dig up as facts to compare it to.

How do I get past all this and feel that my entries are not biased, not an invitation to simply make others mad, and an actual representation of the facts?


Love the avatar Diamond ;)
Click to expand...

Are the post on McBean's claims on the wiki?

May the Noodly One protect you against the Forces of Ignorance!:)
 
Diamond said:
Are the post on McBean's claims on the wiki?
Click to expand...
No. The only thing on the wiki is how vaccines work, and a bit of history.

The fact that EONS posted some of it is what got the one group in a tizzy. MY posting at all is the whole reason it's an invitation to mudslinging. That's what cheezes me off. I apparently have a bad reputation. Nevermind that they lied about my "trollish" behavior.

I guess it would be like trying to convince myself to buy a book on "Hitler with Bunnies". No amount of cute bunnies will ever make hitler look like anything but the devil to me.

Thing is, Hitler deserves his reputation.

I guess I want to know that their opinion doesn't matter. That my efforts won't be totally a waste of time. That the content will matter more than the author.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom