RationalWiki mission statement
From Rationalwikiwki
(Difference between revisions)
(oops :)) |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
:''Feel free to contribute; all are welcome. We encourage anyone who disagrees with us to join up and engage in a constructive dialogue.'' | :''Feel free to contribute; all are welcome. We encourage anyone who disagrees with us to join up and engage in a constructive dialogue.'' | ||
| - | As a partial result of this, as well as RationalWiki members' general delight in discussion and debate, the talk pages are often more interesting, and contain more legitimate content, than the articles themselves.For example, compare [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Problem_of_evil this talk page] with it's pathetically simple [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Problem_of_evil article] | + | As a partial result of this, as well as RationalWiki members' general delight in discussion and debate, the talk pages are often more interesting, and contain more legitimate content, than the articles themselves.<ref>For example, compare [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Talk:Problem_of_evil this talk page] with it's pathetically simple [http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Problem_of_evil article].</ref> |
==Rifferences and snotes== | ==Rifferences and snotes== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 06:27, 6 March 2008
RationalWiki mission statement includes the following:
- Analyzing and refuting the anti-science movement, ideas and people.
- Analyzing and refuting the full range of crank ideas.
- Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism.''
The use of the word "includes" is interesting as it also allows other things to be present on the Wiki. For example, the snarky point of view.
Furthermore users are encouraged to:
- Feel free to contribute; all are welcome. We encourage anyone who disagrees with us to join up and engage in a constructive dialogue.
As a partial result of this, as well as RationalWiki members' general delight in discussion and debate, the talk pages are often more interesting, and contain more legitimate content, than the articles themselves.<ref>For example, compare this talk page with it's pathetically simple article.</ref>
Rifferences and snotes
<references/>
