The issue with Wikis, is that anyone can edit them. With subject matter as contriversial as you are suggesting, I have trouble seeing how it wouldn't be almost immediately subverted.

Though, I'm sure there are ways to circumvent that.

With this new wiki system that reddit is implementing, you can set a karma quota that redditors must have before being allowed to edit it. This doesn't stop the trolls who have accumulated site-wide reddit karma however but with enough demand, I think the mods might make it so that a user would have to have accumulated the karma on whichever subreddit is running the wiki.

You can though also block all users and add them manually. You can also ban users of course, so persistent trolls could be banned and then they would need an alt account with enough karma to re-troll. Using either of those methods could be the way to go. You can also set permissions for individual pages and you can also have invisible mod pages which one automoderator bot creator is planning to use to allow other mods to set its activity with.

The potential is there, but I would rather people do their own objective research; rather than rely on a single source for information.

So long as sources are cited often, it would more-so be a consolidation of existing sources. This would be quite a useful resource, especially if the editing standards are high enough.

I mean yeah but isn't the point of a wiki also to gather sources? I know a lot about certain theories/stories, but for others I just need a quick go-to list of sources.

Agree /r/conspiracy/ crowd sourced wiki could maintain a better record of the BIGGER picture. Lots of good facts get posted into Wikipedia ... and even more great ideas get exposed here ... but over time the Wikipedia shills and hacks delete and or chop up the good work ... the key is "They" know to delete the essential linkage ... if we have an alternative then we can use it the standard ... as a Bonus there is ready made (well sourced) materials that can be copy and pasted back into related Wikipedia articles.

An ever-updating list of sources would be great. I just don't feel we need to make these topics so subjective, as that allows for subversion.

I actually like Sins' idea, though I'd rather it be less of a "wiki" and more of a list of source material. I'm just hung up on the possibility of these articles being too conclusive, hindering objectivity. Listen to everyone, follow no one; that sort of thing.

Listen to everyone, follow no one.

I know it's off topic, but I am stealing that!

Not a huge issue, you must cite sources so bogus info gets taken down eventually.

There are tons of wiki entries that have already been subverted.

...and more than one state funded group has publicly announced their intention on doing just that.

like a community based editing? Changes require votes or something to that effect. certainly that code must exist.

You should never, ever trust a single source for your information. Though I agree, there is probably some form of anti-gaming code possible.

Conspiracy wiki sounds good - Perhaps it can go from a page to page basis, and once one is verified, dated and the event over then the article can be locked. It would have a group of trusted admins to make corrections if the articles reported for whatever case, or is asked to be changed based on new information or whatever.

reddit's coming out with a new wiki system so you could use that:
http://www.reddit.com/r/modnews/comments/th1zo

The politically incorrect wikipedia: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Main_Page

Please notice the difference between this page: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Germar_Rudolf

And this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germar_Rudolf

Notice his claim to fame is prominent in the former and buried in the later.

Metapedia's article is biased.

Metapedia is a white-supremacy mouthpiece.

You'll notice that there's a page for the term "Black racism", but the term "White racism" redirects to "White guilt". I rest my case.

Yep. Just look at the main page.

Seriously, look in the In The News section.

20-year old Black in the United States named Samuel Dye attempts to rape his own grandmother.

James E. Holmes, a communistic member of Occupy Black Bloc and supporter of Barack Obama murders 12 and wounds 50 in Colorado shooting.

Paedophiles in alliance with the American Psychiatric Association demand "social acceptance" along the lines of the homosexual's Sexual Bolshevik revolution.

Judeo-WASP decadent "researchers" at the University of Massachusetts claim that nine-month old ethnic European babies are "racists".

Now let's look at the "Black African" article.

There have been occasional remarkable Black African figures such as Marcus Garvey, however, the popular public figures tend be frivilous bread and circus showmen; atheletes, rap and jazz "musicians".[2] Reasons for the lack of a historical high culture created by Sub-Saharan Africans is a cause of heated debate, some argue it is a hard-wired biological issue (see; race and intelligence), others have attempted to find scape-goats such as "colonialism" (aside from the extensive Islamic imperialism, European discovery in Africa was very brief and built, rather than destroyed) or "oppression".

But what a great website, right guiz? Totes not biased.

Clearly unbiased information, with no agenda!

That made my brain hurt.

Thanks for pointing that out. 'Saved-from-far-right-ideologues' upvote for this guy!

Also check out the pages on Hitler and Auschwitz.

And there is no page for the Holocaust of the Jews

Here's metapedia's article on holocaust revisionism.

Your wiki is a mouthpiece for white-supremacist dreck.

You'll notice that there's a page for the term "Black racism", but the term "White racism" redirects to "White guilt". I rest my case.

For some in r/conspiracy, this is a positive, not a negative point.

Which is a major problem.

Reddit sold out months ago, the content is censored now. Fuck the Reddit wiki.

Its beta but i guess a direct link to reddit wouldn't be a bad thing. The problem is i don't see it as an effective wiki. although the matter of 'what is an effective wiki?' is another problem all together.

I have quite a bit of stuff written up, this would give me an excuse to edit and source it. Im in.

who gets to decide which conspiracy theory is the right one?

[deleted]

Again proving your credit to the crowd here. Thanks for being you.

I do feel that just because one theory is more popular than the other, it shouldnt give them the ability to drown out the other views

[deleted]

I would help.

[deleted]

Trolls. We should definitely do this then.

This would be great

Yep. Good idea.

I used to have this at wikiprotest.com but I couldn't keep up with the spam bots.

I'd be happy to restart the wiki or give people here accounts to make more pages. If you want an account email me jeff@wiki protest.com

You can already create wikipedia articles on conspiracies and link them in with people that are involved in already for example Honestly it would be a waste of time IMO.

Wiki style formats are bot bait if you ask me. The people with the most resources can overcome the individual too easily when editing can be done. Equal representation won't materialize, it will be manufactured.

Not a good idea.

Yes but we need a credible resource that isn't controlled and possibly tainted by Zionist Jewish interests.

wiki pedia is influenced by everyone. Not just Zionists.

Where were you a month ago?

In addition to wikispooks and their Institute for the Study of Globalization and Covert Politics, there's also SourceWatch which is more oriented towards a small section of deep politics rather than conspiracy in general but still probably more useful than regular wikipedia. Though as others have said a freely-editable wiki about conspiracies is just asking for all sorts of disinfo.

Why spend so much energy unpicking narratives while new ones are spun?

[deleted]

Every one needs a launch pad and for noobs it would be a great place to start

Sounds fun.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracies#section_1

Conspiwiki?

Wikiracy?

wiki.conspira.cy

There used to be a website where every word was a hyperlink to a different conspiracy theory. It was a group that I think was pushing the pole reversal theory and how we all needed to be living in hexagonal homes underground to survive. I can't remember the site but it was awesome.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories

Why was this not already linked on this page?

I thought you left or something. How can I get big red letters as my username?

I think it's great. I'd like to help out

Evolutionreddit

You gonna ban people on the wiki too?

Wikipedia works because all articles must have reliable citations. Assuming you want more than a handful of mostly boring articles, how could this ever work for a conspiracy Wiki?

I mean, I know most of you don't have any standards for evidence and believe stuff simply because it sounds interesting and like something an evil shadow government would do, but how do you arbitrate between multiple conflicting conspiracy theories?

For example, the recent shooting involving James Holmes. Explanations range from general fear mongering, over gun control, to intimidating his father due to banking fraud.

9/11 might be an especially difficult topic. What do you go with? Was it Islamists? The US government? The Jews? Government trained terrorists? Mind-controlled agents? Remote-controlled planes? Missiles? Thermite in the walls? Space lasers? Coke can nukes? Because of insurance fraud? Destroying SEC records? Starting wars? Just general Jewish evilness?

Who rules the world? I've seen suggestions ranging from Jews, over Illuminati, free masons, reptilians, aliens, "inter-dimensional beings", various corporations, banks, certain families, the Bilderberg group, or combinations thereof.

Most of this doesn't have any evidence, just circumstances that sound more or (commonly) less plausible. Who's right, and what explanation ends up in the article? Will you maintain a thousand branching articles for every topic?

I've been kicking that idea around for a while too. It's easy to set up a Mediawiki Wiki, and a server is cheap too. This could easily be done.

We should make it a wiki based on conspiracy truths, or have a section for them. Since most conspiracies are based on a lot of hearsay and non verifiable facts, they are still not palatable for the majority. But possibly showing the definitive, proven, out in the light conspiracies all in one place, might make people think, at least more than just a bunch of rambling what ifs and maybes, While much of our ramblings may(!) be true, i can see how it sounds like gibberish to the people UN-initiated with the depth that conspiracies have been actually PROVEN to reach... And that's a bigger goal than proving any one conspiracy, just to prove that it can happen, has happened, and all evidence leads to it being an ongoing problem. A historical base is a great place to build our credibility moving forward.

like this: http://web.archive.org/web/20061026155231/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proven_conspiracies - Of course wikipedia took it down for not being up to spec, but the blatant ones are all there.

I want to so bigfoot!

Yes.. I was thinking of something,like this in my earlier post about a sidebar with categories..

+1

Oh this would be fun.

There's already one here:

http://educate-yourself.org

[deleted]

Your welcome.

Btw, I thought I'd let you know that you're being targed on a private forum by EPS trolls.

Apparently, /r/conspiracy and /r/libertarian are on their hit list.

Same with a few people that are active in /r/nolibswatch

According to that screen, Libertarian was already hit. "Libertarian down-vote bot"?

I think so as well...

Maybe read a few of the articles first.

I found that site a while back and then became dissapointed after reading it. I might have even deleted the bookmark.

♥

So that means you guys believe that clouds are living entities or 'slyphs' ?

I dont trust everything on there.

If you ever do DMT while in the middle of the forest you will see the trees come to life with a face.

I read several books on dmt. Definitely a trip. I mean common visions? Seeing faces coming out of walls?

Hmmm, well the common visions would be seeing different entities trying to interact with you.

I mean seeing scenarios being played out. One instance of turning into a jaguar and running. Another is being in a boat with slaves rowing.

But yeah various entities have been reported. Common one being a praying mantis entity. Sounds out there but I believe it. Egyptian book of the dead saw mantises as guardians of the underworld.

Sources:

Dmt spirit molecule (university of new mexico)

Antipodes of the mind (hebrew university)

Erowid trip reports

Interesting trips. The first one sounds like they became their power animal. The second one sounds like he had a past life regression memory. If you're interested in stories like these then you should check out /r/psychonaut where some people post their own experiences as well.

Yeah but it wasn't an individual experience but an experience that many people reported from all walks of life.

Yeah I frequent that sub often. And /r/occult

Yeah. That's what tends to happen when you do psychadelic drugs.

Yet, your brain makes DMT as you sleep. What's your point?

woosh

I'm trying to help you understand son.

Great idea... We could call it wikileaks.
Let me check if this name is already taken...

If it has plenty of space for leftist propaganda, and antisemitism, then it is bound to be a success.

Lefist propaganda and "antisemitism" are as far removed as one can get.

You understand that Socialism was a primarily Jewish invention, correct?

The word "semite" does NOT mean what you think it means!

The term Semite means a member of any of various ancient and modern Semitic-speaking peoples originating in southwestern Asia, including; Akkadians (Assyrians and Babylonians), Eblaites, Ugarites, Canaanites, Phoenicians (including Carthaginians), Hebrews (Israelites, Judeans and Samaritans), Ahlamu, Arameans, Chaldeans, Amorites, Moabites, Edomites, Hyksos, Arabs, Nabateans, Maganites, Shebans, Sutu, Ubarites, Dilmunites, Bahranis, Maltese, Mandaeans, Sabians, Syriacs, Mhallami, Amalekites and Ethiopian Semites.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semite

"Anti-Semitic" was coined in 1879 by German journalist Wilhelm Marr. He was wrongly using that word then, and you are wrongly using that word now.

[deleted]

like a community based editing? Changes require votes or something to that effect. certainly that code must exist.

With this new wiki system that reddit is implementing, you can set a karma quota that redditors must have before being allowed to edit it. This doesn't stop the trolls who have accumulated site-wide reddit karma however but with enough demand, I think the mods might make it so that a user would have to have accumulated the karma on whichever subreddit is running the wiki.

You can though also block all users and add them manually. You can also ban users of course, so persistent trolls could be banned and then they would need an alt account with enough karma to re-troll. Using either of those methods could be the way to go. You can also set permissions for individual pages and you can also have invisible mod pages which one automoderator bot creator is planning to use to allow other mods to set its activity with.

Not a huge issue, you must cite sources so bogus info gets taken down eventually.

There are tons of wiki entries that have already been subverted.

You should never, ever trust a single source for your information. Though I agree, there is probably some form of anti-gaming code possible.

The potential is there, but I would rather people do their own objective research; rather than rely on a single source for information.

Conspiracy wiki sounds good - Perhaps it can go from a page to page basis, and once one is verified, dated and the event over then the article can be locked. It would have a group of trusted admins to make corrections if the articles reported for whatever case, or is asked to be changed based on new information or whatever.

wiki.conspira.cy