Conservapedia Obsessions

by Joey deVilla on November 20, 2007

Mr. Garrison from “South Park”: “I’m not gay, I just act that way!”

What are the readers of Conservapedia, the “conservative” answer to Wikipedia, most obsessed with? According to their stats page as of November 20, 2007 at 4:26 p.m. EST, the top 10 most viewed pages are:

  1. Main Page [1,895,008]
  2. Homosexuality [1,476,964]
  3. Homosexuality and Hepatitis [516,039]
  4. Homosexuality and Promiscuity [416,430]
  5. Homosexuality and Parasites [387,291]
  6. Homosexuality and Gonorrhea [327,815]
  7. Homosexuality and Domestic Violence [319,852]
  8. Gay Bowel Syndrome [306,436]
  9. Homosexuality and Syphilis [261,799]
  10. Homosexuality and Mental Health [243,930]

Conservapedia’s readership doth protest too much, methinks.

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

safetychick November 20, 2007 at 7:10 pm

Ha! Snort! Conservatism and sex scandals – I wonder if they have that page in their Conservapedia.

Conservatipedia December 2, 2007 at 12:32 pm

Hey everyone, Conservapedia is a weird site. You’ll notice I own conservatipedia, which is spelled different and designed to mock.

I found this article to be pretty funny. Who would of guessed gay bowel syndrome would be such a hot topic.

I noticed they changed the page counts probably yesterday. The other day I put the exact counts on my site, now gay bowel movement has only 100 page views instead of 300,000.

What a bunch of douchebags.

Uchiha December 3, 2007 at 3:34 am

Well, it’s true (and fairly obvious) that the stats are being boosted by refreshbots of some sort. But who wrote and sanctionned all those article – including gems like “Gay Bowel Syndrome” and “Homosexuality and Scotland” – in the first place? That was all Conservapedia’s doing. More specifically, the doing of a certain User:Conservative, whose subsequent exploits can be viewed here.

With respect to RationalWiki, the boost was not actually any sort of organized or even acknowledged effort. You can see RationalWiki’s stance on Conservapedia here – while their distaste for the site is apparent, vandalism, in general, is not condoned.

Evidently there’s a good chance that whoever did this does have an account at RationalWiki, , but that doesn’t make the site accountable for the vandalism – and certainly not for Conservapedia’s inherent insanity anyway.

So in conclusion: it’s still hilarious.

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: