It is currently Mon Sep 23, 2019 6:19 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 
 Metapedia 
Author Message

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Metapedia
Check out this: http://en.metapedia.org
It's waay better than Conservapedia or Wikipedia.

Why?

The Catholic pages are all sedevacantist. :)

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sat Jun 07, 2014 4:56 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 210
New post Re: Metapedia
Awesome, plus its hilarious in some parts. Whoever did the editing certainly has a sense of humour.

We should really start a Sedevacantist wiki, there is so much information that is spread out throughout the forum that it is difficult to show a cohesive place where we can show all our principles as applied to different areas of living a Catholic life.

In a wiki we could dedicate all our material to each papal claimant, give our sources etc... Do a good job, in presenting so much intellectual effort that many have already given. Then on top of that we can be able to write an app through DuckduckGo search engine that can automatically show results of our wiki on top of the page (through duckduckhack). Now for Google I am not sure we can do something similar. Then I can also add to Yacy the P2P search engine, archive it into the search engine also. I am reading some books on Solr (java based search engine) that is one of the bases for the Yacy search engine.

I will go over into this a bit more in detail later on, but I am already starting to do some of the learning so that I can get started on this project. I really do believe in a Catholic economic way of doing things, and this can be seen as a cooperative effort. In much a similar way as posting on a forum, it is a spirit of the cooperative (beyond capitalism).

The Wiki should be written in a tone, that is objective and without going too much into sensationalism. It must also be written where the sedeplenist can be able to stomach it, many of them are extremely sensitive. So we should be as cordial as possible, without for example shortening or giving nicknames to any of the anti Conciliar popes. Just calling them by their full proper name they were born with etc... The reason is pretty obvious, Wikipedia serves its function well in many other things but it is simply way too slanted with a liberal bias. So the current articles on Wikipedia are either too short, lacking sources and the real substance of the Sedevacantist argument.

There should be a history written of all the traditional groups, as to why some of them are wrong etc... Just have a good place to give our sources and information from an objective point of view. In the spirit of the Thomistic method :D .

_________________
Laudare, Benedicere et predicare...
Bitcoin donations: 15aKZ5oPzRWVubqgSceK6DifzwtzJ6MRpv


Sat Jun 07, 2014 9:30 pm
Profile E-mail
Site Admin

Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:30 pm
Posts: 4334
New post Re: Metapedia
Great idea. I'll write the book, the rest of you write the wiki. :)

_________________
In Christ our King.


Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:36 pm
Profile E-mail

Joined: Fri Oct 28, 2011 3:40 am
Posts: 438
Location: Tucson, Arizona
New post Re: Metapedia
I already have Moerwiki up. It could morph into a sede wiki.

_________________
«The Essence & Topicality of Thomism»: http://ar.gy/5AaP
by Fr. Réginald Garrigou-Lagrange, O.P.
e-Book: bit.ly/1iDkMAw

Modernism: modernism. us.to
blog: sententiaedeo.blogspot. com
Aristotelian Thomism: scholastic. us.to


Sun Jun 08, 2014 12:05 am
Profile E-mail

Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 5:14 pm
Posts: 210
New post Re: Metapedia
Please personal message if someone would like to be a contributor. I need to get some names, people who can go over some of the grunt work.

The more people the better, as it helps be able to distribute the workload.

I think the Orthoducks wiki http://orthodoxwiki.org/Main_Page, should be a good model we should follow. They did it right, and it gets the job done.

The important thing is to have people that are sound in Thomism as editor's, and every single footnote should be thoroughly double checked. Wikipedia is pretty decent, but there are many out there that have done a much better job at doing some sort of peer review process that has improved Wikipedia.

_________________
Laudare, Benedicere et predicare...
Bitcoin donations: 15aKZ5oPzRWVubqgSceK6DifzwtzJ6MRpv


Mon Oct 20, 2014 2:51 am
Profile E-mail
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 5 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 13 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.