RationalWiki

From Rotten Websites Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


RationalWiki
Rational Wiki logo.jpg
It's about as rational as the Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic.
Type of site: Wiki
Language: English, Russian and more
Created by: Volunteer contributors
Owner: RationalMedia Foundation
Date of launch: May 22, 2007
Status: Active


RationalWiki (RW for short) is a wiki whose stated aims are to "critique and challenge pseudoscience and the anti-science movement, explore authoritarianism and fundamentalism and analyze how these subjects are handled in the media".

It was created in 2007 to counter Conservapedia after an incident in which Peter Lipson and several other contributors attempting to edit Conservapedia were banned. The website has since explicitly moved its focus away from Conservapedia.

Why It's Rotten

  1. RationalWiki is not an encyclopedia (even some of its own members admit that), it's instead a snarky blogging site pretending to be one.
    • Christopher Langan even described it as "a pseudointellectual tourist trap whose inhabitants are fiercely dedicated to the mockery and defamation of people and ideas to which its proprietor objects."
  2. Like their right-wing counterpart, Conservapedia, RationalWiki is extremely ideologically biased and can even sometimes exhibit regressive Democrat far-left traits.
  3. They label a lot of things as "alt-right", including sources that has criticized them such as Encyclopædia Dramatica and Kiwi Farms.
  4. Many of their articles are simply irrational, one-sided rants.
    • A good example is the subject of UFO: Wikipedia offered a highly informative and well-sourced article, while RationalWiki made a page dedicated to the mockery of such belief.
  5. The people running and/or contributing to it do a terrible job at sourcing for their articles, many links included are either dead, image only, unarchived Twitter/Tumblr/Reddit posts that can be easily forged, deleted or modified, or heavily biased.
  6. Filled with logical fallacies, most notably argumentum ad hominem (attacking the person instead of the addressing the subject of debate) and name-calling. They even have categories like Insufferable Assholes, Batshit Crazy, and Pissed at us.
  7. Ryulong, although they got sick of him eventually.[1]
  8. Despite being called "RationalWiki", its members act more like petulant jerks than rational individuals who mock people that call them out instead of defeating their arguments rationally.
    • Example: The Rebuttal to "It's almost as if Rationalwiki editors aren't rational at all..." is "'But I thought this was supposed to be RATIONALWiki!' Drink!"
  9. Extremely pro-SocJus. For more information, see more popular definitions of Social Justice Warriors.
    • Despite that, RationalWiki completely denies SocJus infestation, as they audaciously claim "If there was a hostile takeover, we didn’t notice."
    • On subject of antifeminism, they portray it as negatively as possible, dismissed any issue with third-wave feminism as actions of a handful of "bad apples" or exaggerated details instead of properly addressing them.
    • A large chunk of the MRA article is dedicated to debunking MRA's claims (the page even opens up with a feminist quote), while there's no such section on the feminist article.
  10. They like to present readers with crudely made conclusions instead of letting the evidence speak for itself. This is more of an act of insecurity as they fear that people will not see things they way they do.
  11. Some of its members consider all Trump supporters to be Neo-Nazis and it should be moral to inflict violence on them.[2]
  12. They like to whitewash originally well-intentioned but nowadays corrupt and violent groups such as BLM and Antifa.
  13. Some of its members are extremely toxic and intolerant towards anyone who so much as disagrees with them.
    • Even so, they still pretend that they are welcoming to outsiders, claiming that they "only censor with love".
  14. They have absolutely no qualms in using racial or homophobic slurs.
  15. They have a policy called "Snarky point of view", in which the articles generally are supposed to be written in the most snarky tone possible. This at times leads to a deterioration of quality and made articles more insulting than funny.
  16. Many of their articles are badly and lazily made, especially their Niggermania page.
  17. According to them, charity is nothing but guilt reduction.
  18. They do not believe in races.
  19. They aren't immune against their former or even becoming Democratic party members who become Green Party, Independent or even creating fringe Left-wing parties they think SMALL left-wing party to merge of corruptly flaw major party to win.
  20. On February 7, 2019, they somehow discovered the page covering them on Rotten Websites Wiki, retaliating by calling the users "basement dwellers". But thankfully, both RW and RWW made some arrangement on their discussion page.

Redeeming Qualities

  1. Its snarky style of writing can be humorous at times.
  2. It's more factual than Conservapedia.
  3. They are willing to admit that not all Democrats are good people (see their article on Michael Moore). They likewise have an admiration for Trump-opposing Republicans like John McCain.
  4. They are against the anti-vaccination, flat-earther and other similar pseudo-scientific movements.

Read More

For more information on how far from rationality RationalWiki can get, please see their Gamergate articles (to their credit, Ryulong is the one behind most of them)[3].

Reference

  1. https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/First_world_problems


avatar

Pinky Malinky

12 months ago
Score 6
PKMN's favorite website before he got banned.
avatar

Breakin' Benny

12 months ago
Score 6
Clearly, UglyRat went way too far and let it get to their head.
avatar

JaguarByte Productions

11 months ago
Score 5
PKMN is so bad , even his favorite website banned him.
avatar

Mar9122

8 months ago
Score 0
For some reason, I prefer RationalWiki than Wikipedia because it's easier to read.
avatar

Mar9122

6 months ago
Score 0
Or maybe Conservapedia is better? Who know cuz I don't know what political side I should take.
avatar

Dominicmgm

2 months ago
Score 0
Be neutral, that's what I do.
avatar

Kaynedenny

6 months ago
Score 2
The wiki found us!
avatar

Mar9122

6 months ago
Score 1
I know and they're pissed at us.
avatar

Pinky Malinky

6 months ago
Score 2
YoU jUsT hArRaSsEd A rAtIoNaLwIkI eDiToR
avatar

NintenDylan64

6 months ago
Score 3
RationalWiki? That's saying something, that website is the opposite of rational.
avatar

Pacsonic9000

4 months ago
Score 0
Did Mar9122 discover a page on him on RationalWiki? I remember seeing a video on him reading a page on himself on that wiki.
avatar

Mar9122

4 months ago
Score 0
Who? What video?
avatar

Url8

one month ago
Score 0

When I first found this website, I legitimately thought this was a joke website like Encyclopedia Dramatica! Turned out, it wasn't supposed to be one!

Maybe they should rename the site and "convert" it to a joke we site, theh don't need to do much to make it a joke site as I already thought it was one!

You are not allowed to post comments.