Conservapedia

All fun out of the pool for oldfag swim! "Zeeky Boogy Doog!"

This burger is a American win, or something

THESE PEOPLE ARE SEETHING CLITTYCELS! Don't make xem angry, or xeir clitties may start leaking!

Conservapedia

Foundation	Nov. 21, 2006 (20 years ago)
Creator	Andrew Schlafy
Owner	Andrew Schlafy
Major Boards	Top articles: evidence for Christianity, Liberal style, San Francisco Values,
Total posts	50,000 articles 991 million page views as of Late 2025
Notable Events	Rob Smith edit war, Anon edit ban, War with """rational""" wiki, Lenski paper incident, Rightipedia Splinter,
Website	www.conservapedia.com

Conservapedia is ruby.

Conservapedia is a encyclopedia dramatica like wiki fork but much less faggoted and much more serious aldoe being around the same age with it being 20 years old and ED being 22 years old. It has had multiple splinters such as Rightipedia, leftypedia, and """Rational""" wiki. With leftypedia being such a pedocore faggotdump DNB of a site it doesn't even have its own wikipedia page and has gotten raided by /pol/ repeatedly. The leftipedia writer of the soyjak.party article has also been doxxed and looks like a xitter bird soyjak. """rational""" wiki for some reason is seen as an unbiased source for info by faggots and is literally compared to snopes on its own wikipedia page.

Conservapedia's staff has a strange rule and belief that nazi germany (due to the name national socialist) is and was a leftist party so therefore they do not have to cover nazi germany in detail so therefore prevent being called neo nazis. Also so tey can say anti-semitism is a mainly leftist thing in a snarky redditor ben shapiro way. This is a shitlib tactic and is one of the few things un-keyed conservapedia has done. To respond to this, a neo nazi named Eleonóra Dubiczki (namefag: Fiala) gathered multiple metapedia and conservapedia chud editors and made rightipedia. it was SNCA and DNB and was barely even right wing apart from the nazi shit and defended leftist ideas such as darwinism. Metapedia itself was just a shitty anti-american version of ED and that's all you need to know about it.

After all this conservapedia is the only of these sites to still exist and thrive to this day. It is an oldfag gem which must be protected.

Many chronically online faggots have tried to vandalize conservapedia late at night because they are losers and don't sleep. Its quite geggy watching them say things like "i would give them a REAL reason to worry about vandalism" then quitting after one obstacle. Oldest post i could find about this was from some Australian troll on TVtropes getting no help at all and the thread getting locked after three useless replys.

If you were interested in creating an account you had to do it in the daytime within the U.S. which was a minor inconvenience unless you were a redditor or Tvtropes forums user from 2012 apparently. But now they have fixed this problem since then more efficiently and you can just submit a form at anytime to create an account and they will most likely accept you. The form and guide is located on the Conservapedia:Join page.

• 
  Aschlafly, the creator of conservapedia
• 
  Phyllis Schlafy, Aschlafly's mother with Ronald Reagan
• 
  Conservapedia's homepage as of 1/24/2025
• 
  Aschlafty OWNING a complaining Canadian faggot

Nick Fuentes Endorsement

CAUTION: POSSIBLE TRANNY PEDOPHILE(S)
You can help by fact checking everything before ordering 'za to xir house

Pedo-meter: ? ▲

In 2025 Conservative influencer and possible faggot and pedophile Nick Fuentes endorsed the site while going on a long, 5 hour tirade against DA JOOS!!!!!!!!. This attracted multiple anti Fuentes left wing Nusois, referred to as Connors, to join the site. Some were good, and some were bad, like Danhicks, who attempted to raid the site with links to a video of Nick Fuentes allegedly hanging out with a femboy. Snopes has not yet verified the existence of the video, and all of the tiraders were banned.

Here's the trvth: fuentes is most likely not a faggot just has made multiple faggotted remarks in the past as a joke. The Epstein comments were also ""jokes"" but are unfunnny niggerbrim which impplies he idolizes a pedophile. Either way he is a net positive for the conservative movement as he brings more people to the chud lifestyle, as for the fed allegations he was suppressed for 10 years and got kicked out of trumps dinner for speaking against him so honestly i don't think so but anything is possible with this braniggersissy...

A photo used by Danhicks to disparage Mr. Fuentes. Note the hazy shadow and that one of the Femboy’s cat ears appears to be sinking into his head

Rob Smith Namefag Drama

A prolific user's Badges

Rob Smith is a prominent editor on conservapedia who is a staunch warrior z!russian defender who opposes the war in Ukraine and the "problematic neo nazis" whom fill their ranks. Some other editor literally named conservative who had a smaller amount of notoriety had vandalised a page of conservapedia to a ukrainian propaganda poster even going as far to change conservapedias logo from an american flag to a ukrainian flag with the words "slava ukrani!". Rob Smith then began LEAKING! and just couldnt take it anymore. Him and multiple other ki' editors fixed the graffitti and then he documented the whole thing on his user page. On a serious not this whole situation is quite geggy and i see nobaldi talk about it. And he makes a big fuss about it on his page calling them antisemites and allat. Rob also had conservative doxxed and a picture of him is still available on rob's user page. Rob is a based chudcell oldfag we all love.

• 
  a toss’ depiction of the drama, featuring Johnbert, conservapedia’s version of nate higgerson, based off of john bert smith
• 
  The image of User:Conservative
• 
  The page in question

Terms and Lingo

• Johnbert (active user, basically Soyteen)
• John Bert (their version of Nate Higgers)
• Connor (Overly-left-wing-man, soyboy)
• Chad (older right wing chud)
• Doomer (person who spends way too much time on the internet)
• GOPoon (A young female conservative)
• GOPencil (A young male conservative)
• Kamala (A Democrat)
• Ukrani (A liberal troll looking to vandalize, like in the case of User:Conservative, who spammed Ukrani propaganda)
• Bureaucrat (wiki Janny)
• Fuentes (A Republican)

Notable Essays

Essays are large pages or sections usually of a person's user page proving their point on any topic. User:Conservative (despite being a faggot and getting RAPED by chudGOD john smith) has a large number of schzobabble essays proving Christianity and convincing those who read them to convert. while john smith's consist of evidence proving how when User:Conservative was a janny the site went into DnB state as he is a terrible and inactive janny like froot. These "Essays" separate them from the rest of other chud wikis like Encyclopedia Dramatica, SoyjakWiki, and this very wiki as nobaldi else does this mainly as Encyclopedia Dramatica fags are too retarded and we are too unserious and geggy. The essays often involve giant quotes and excerpts with intersessional explanations and summaries of the quotes done by the author. Conservapedia Essay writing is a keyed artform.

User:Conservative's essay on the benefits of Christianity

1

In his article The Triumph of the Gospel of Love, Monk Themistocles (Adamopoulo) wrote: “ It is generally agreed by scholars and saints that the teaching of "love" and charity represent one of the essential dimensions of the Gospel of Jesus and the Gospel of Paul. Accordingly, from the extant words and parables of Jesus many concern themselves with the message of love. For example on the Sunday of Meat Fare, from the Gospel of Matthew, we hear Jesus identifying Himself and in solidarity with the destitute, the suffering, the rejected and the oppressed, calling for and rewarding altruistic philanthropy: "... I was hungry and you fed me, when I was thirsty you gave me drink, when I was a stranger you took me in, when naked you clothed me, when I was ill you came to my help, when in prison you visited me ... I tell you this anything you did for one of my brothers here, however humble, you did it for me." (Matt 25:35-36, 40)... Christians undertook a great deal of almsgiving to the poor not only to fellow believers but to pagans as well. So amazed was the anti-Christian pagan emperor Julian the Apostate (361-363 AD), with the sheer benevolence and excellence of Christian philanthropy that he was forced to admit in wonder their superiority over paganism in matters of charity: "These godless Galileans (ie. Christians) feed not only their own poor but ours: our poor lack our care" (Ep. Sozom. 5:16). ” Philippians 2:1-2 declares, “If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose.” 1 John 1:6-7 says, “If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.” In December 2003, the University of Warwick reported: "Dr. Stephen Joseph, from the University of Warwick, said: "Religious people seem to have a greater purpose in life, which is why they are happier. Looking at the research evidence, it seems that those who celebrate the Christian meaning of Christmas are on the whole likely to be happier."[4] The ex-atheist C.S. Lewis became a Christian and wrote a book entitled Surprised by Joy. St. Basil of Caesarea founded the first large-scale hospital. Christian hospitals subsequently spread quickly throughout both the East and the West.[6] See: Christianity and hospitals St. Basil of Caesarea founded the first hospital. Christian hospitals subsequently spread quickly throughout both the East and the West. The First Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D. ordered the construction of a hospital for every cathedral town in the Roman Empire to care for the poor, sick, widows, and strangers. They were staffed and funded by religious orders and volunteers. The article "The Surprising Discovery About Those Colonialist, Proselytizing Missionaries" published in Christianity Today notes: “ In his fifth year of graduate school, Woodberry created a statistical model that could test the connection between missionary work and the health of nations. He and a few research assistants spent two years coding data and refining their methods. They hoped to compute the lasting effect of missionaries, on average, worldwide... One morning, in a windowless, dusty computer lab lit by fluorescent bulbs, Woodberry ran the first big test. After he finished prepping the statistical program on his computer, he clicked "Enter" and then leaned forward to read the results. "I was shocked," says Woodberry. "It was like an atomic bomb. The impact of missions on global democracy was huge. I kept adding variables to the model—factors that people had been studying and writing about for the past 40 years—and they all got wiped out. It was amazing. I knew, then, I was on to something really important." Woodberry already had historical proof that missionaries had educated women and the poor, promoted widespread printing, led nationalist movements that empowered ordinary citizens, and fueled other key elements of democracy. Now the statistics were backing it up: Missionaries weren't just part of the picture. They were central to it... Areas where Protestant missionaries had a significant presence in the past are on average more economically developed today, with comparatively better health, lower infant mortality, lower corruption, greater literacy, higher educational attainment (especially for women), and more robust membership in nongovernmental associations. In short: Want a blossoming democracy today? The solution is simple—if you have a time machine: Send a 19th-century missionary." ...at a conference presentation in 2002, Woodberry got a break. In the room sat Charles Harper Jr., then a vice president at the John Templeton Foundation, which was actively funding research on religion and social change. (Its grant recipients have included Christianity Today.) Three years later, Woodberry received half a million dollars from the foundation's Spiritual Capital Project, hired almost 50 research assistants, and set up a huge database project at the University of Texas, where he had taken a position in the sociology department. The team spent years amassing more statistical data and doing more historical analyses, further confirming his theory. ...Woodberry's historical and statistical work has finally captured glowing attention. A summation of his 14 years of research—published in 2012 in the American Political Science Review, the discipline's top journal—has won four major awards, including the prestigious Luebbert Article Award for best article in comparative politics. Its startling title: "The Missionary Roots of Liberal Democracy." ...over a dozen studies have confirmed Woodberry's findings. The growing body of research is beginning to change the way scholars, aid workers, and economists think about democracy and development. ” John Wesley David Beidel wrote in his article The Bloodless Revolution: What We Need to Learn from John Wesley and the Great Awakening “ In the 18th Century, most of Europe was on fire. Bloody civil wars and revolutions were decimating nation after nation. Unrestrained injustice, government and Church corruption, slave trade and the oppression of the poor created a powder keg for violence. Miraculously, Great Britain escaped the horrors of civil war and the brutal savagery that revolutionary anarchy engenders. Few ancient monarchies are still in place today. The mystery of the UK’s capacity to honor the old guard, while raising up a more democratic system without a revolution, is a sociological wonder. Many credit the Great Awakening, in particular the Methodist movement, launched by John Wesley, for this extraordinary and peaceful transition. Methodism unleashed an army of “little Christ’s” all over Europe. They cared for the poor, took in unwanted and abused children, fought unjust laws and labor conditions, visited prisoners, and battled against slavery; They joined hands with the Apostles and “turned the world upside down.” Eventually compassion became fashionable... America is in desperate need of a Christ-infused revolution of compassion. We are a land of churches, who are well positioned to hear and answer the cries of our struggling communities. If a critical mass of congregations committed themselves to radically sharing the Gospel and passionately serving under-resourced/at-risk communities, we will see peace powerfully rise in these times of trouble. This will also enable, as in the days of John Wesley, wise reformation to take place because the true Christian Church is theologically hardwired to bring about peaceful, meaningful change that benefits all. I have written much about this in my book, Samaria, The Great Omission, and treasure every opportunity to strategize with churches who have a heart to minister in this way. Let us stand in the gap as cultural/community peacemakers and healers in this season of sorrow and division. May our magnificent obsession be Jesus, the everlasting, ever loving, rescuer of the oppressed and Father of all. ” The Catholic areas of Liechtenstein, Luxembourg and Monaco are among the top geographic areas when it comes to the most productive countries per capita income. The wealthy country of Switzerland is 32% Catholic and 20% Swiss Protestantism in 2022 (See: Cultural characteristics of the most productive countries per capita)

Shobson20's essay against Catholicism

2

Roman Catholicism There are many great conservative Catholics, such as Abby Johnson, Former Planned Parenthood Clinic director and Lila Rose, President and founder of Live Action. Nevertheless, I have extreme misgivings about the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church and many of the things its priesthood and Magisterium have done. Why I will never be Roman Catholic It's frightening to think that so many Catholics have trusted in the sacraments to save them rather than Christ (See "Talking with Catholic Friends and Family" by former Roman Catholic James G. McCarthy starting on page 55). Paul said in Ephesians 2:9, Romans 3:27, and Romans 4:2, no one can boast about the things that they do to merit Eternal Life. Paul teaches in Romans 4:4 that anything that is earned by works and deeds is not a gift (which Salvation is described in Ephesians 2:8) and in Romans 11:6, Paul teaches that if you add works to grace, it is by definition no longer grace. The Roman Catholic Church, on the other hand, defines "grace" something that is quantifiable and increases through works such as good deeds and the sacraments, and decreases with sin. Isaiah 64:6 reveals that God considers any works we do as useless "filthy rags" when it comes to our standing. In Catholicism, there is no sense of becoming a wholly "new creation" as outlined in 2 Corinthians 5:17, rather, they are the same person with sins removed by a priest in a temporary state of righteousness until they sin again. Dataclarifier posted a copied article in which a Catholic priest says "St. Paul commands all Christians to be intercessors/mediators." While I agree with the intercessory prayer part. I do not see that as commanding churches to set up the confession booths with the "forgive me father for I have sinned..." and the "pray the Rosary 5 times and do 3 Hail Marys..." Hardon also says "And remember, we are not talking about necessity here. The Church is not claiming Christ couldn’t get the job done so he needed help. Of course not! He could do it all—and all by himself—if he wanted to. He could come down here right now and write this blog post much more effectively than I ever could. But he chooses not to do everything himself, strictly speaking. He delights in using his body to communicate his life and love to the world." Exactly, but Catholics get it in their minds that they can't be forgiven without a priest to do the confession rite. Yes, Christ does use his body to communicate, there is no conflict with what Protestants believe there. "What, after all, is Apollos? And what is Paul? Only servants, through whom you came to believe--as the Lord has assigned to each his task. I planted the seed, Apollos watered it, but God has been making it grow." 1 Corinthians 3:5-6 A priest, however, makes himself more than a mere servant, actually having a level of supernatural control over the penitent's forgiveness and being able to declare what they must do to have their sin removed. Richard Bennett understood this when he used to take confessions and never tried get around it the way Hardon does. We do not "misinterpret" or "misrepresent" Catholicism, we merely analyze what it's practices logically imply and are confused by the mental gymnastics done by Catholic apologists. As This video says "Most, if not all, that happens to us when we receive Christ would be invalidated if salvation could be lost." Ultimately, a Catholic's salvation is dependent on continuous participation in Church rites and rituals, not on being Born Again or a new creation. I am not the best debater, there are men who are much wiser than I. I merely wish to articulate my beliefs. I have also heard many Catholics deny that the Bible was ever denied to the common people despite ‘We prohibit also that the laity should be permitted to have the books of the Old and the New Testament; unless anyone from the motives of devotion should wish to have the Psalter or the Breviary for divine offices or the hours of the blessed Virgin; but we most strictly forbid their having any translation of these books.’ From the council of Toulouse in 1229 Catholic Conservapedians have NOT shaken my faith Dataclarifier boasted that I gave a "hot" response because "the truth hurts." the only thing that bothers me about that is his own hubris. Most of the canards that Catholic Conservapedians throw around are ones that I've heard and heard debunked a thousand times before. The fact is, plenty of Protestants have read the Bible from cover-to-cover and have answers to all of the proof texts that Catholic apologists attempt to use and most of what DC has attempted to use are ones that they would have never even considered as supporting Catholic doctrine until someone like DC says it does. Most of the proof texts do not directly describe a Catholic concept, but have more general language that they have twisted to make an ad hoc argument. This video strengthened my faith even more. Even though Richard Bennett was a Catholic priest for over 20 years he can see the obvious contradictions between Catholic doctrine and scripture and doesn't dance around it, or attempt ad hoc justifications. The Roman Catholic Church's dark history and present evil I believe that the Roman Catholic Church has committed many atrocities throughout its history, and the Magisterium continues to cover up sin in the priesthood today with all of the abuse scandals. For more information, see "Catholicism: East of Eden" by former Roman Catholic priest Richard Bennett.

Ed Poor's essay on the problems with Wikipedia

3

Here are the most commonly violated principles of neutral editing at Wikipedia: It is inappropriate to remove blocks of well-referenced information which is germane to the subject from articles on the grounds that the information advances a point of view. Wikipedia's NPOV policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view. Wikipedia's neutral point-of-view (NPOV) policy contemplates inclusion of all significant points of view regarding any subject on which there is division of opinion. Wikipedia articles should contain information regarding the subject of the article; they are not a platform for advocacy regarding one or another point of view regarding the topic. Sweeping generalizations which label the subject of an article as one thing or another are inappropriate and not a substitute for adequate research regarding details of actual positions and actions which can speak for themselves. Injection of personal viewpoints regarding the subject of an article is inappropriate and not to be resolved by debate among the editors of an article, but referenced from reputable outside resources. See Wikipedia:No original research and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda advocacy or advertising. A strong point of view expressed elsewhere on a subject does not necessarily mean POV-pushing editing on Wikipedia; that can only be determined by the edits to Wikipedia. Unexplained deletions of portions of controversial articles are unacceptable. I am on probation at Wikipedia for trying to point out some of these problems and just might get my account blocked! :-)