Some creationists pretending to do science under the heading of “intelligent design proponents” are angry with Wikipedia, essentially because Wikipedia’s editors have standards too high for creationism in a lab coat.
Here are the words of the creationist making the complaint:
PLoS One has a highly technical study out of editing patterns on Wikipedia. This is of special interest to us because Wikipedia’s articles on anything to do with intelligent design are replete with errors and lies, which the online encyclopedia’s volunteer editors are vigilant about maintaining against all efforts to set the record straight.
Right, it isn’t at all because they are maintaining articles about science fact, and you are trying to advertise your Christ fanfiction.
Meanwhile, here is Wikipedia’s article mentioning “cdesign proponentsists.” But perhaps that’s not fair. Wikipedia is apparently run by a tyranny of the unemployed, what about the court of popular opinion? Urban dictionary gives this example of the use of the word:
Science says man evolved from other apes. Cdesign proponentsists say apes smell and prefer the scientific explanation “Goddidit”.
Ouch. Rational Wiki? Good luck there, creationism.
You know, maybe creationists should stick to editing Conservapedia, if they don’t want to deal with people pointing out nasty facts.
Found the story at Friendly Atheist.