RationalWiki:Side-by-side

Good use of side-by-side, from 1792. It's tradition!

A side-by-side (SBS) article is one which divides text into two or more columns, usually with the text of an article on the left and RationalWiki's response on the right. This allow us to point out just how wrong someone is, point by point.

These often represent what might be called "RationalWiki's finest hours" – someone finds a pseudoscience article somewhere, ideally by a very public figure, and within days we may have a detailed point-by-point refutation and discussion of its flaws. (If done badly, however, then it's often just a war between two impenetrable blocks of text.) See examples at Category:Side-by-side articles.

There are two hard parts of writing a side-by-side article:

• The first is finding good candidates. If you, dear reader, happen to know of any lunacy that deserves the side-by-side treatment, please drop us a note at the Saloon bar or at the to-do list!
• The second is fatigue. Good writing usually gets to the point in a concise, easily understood way. Pseudoscience supporters don't always uphold this rule, often preferring to use Gish Gallops and walls of text to get their points across. Collaboration can only make a SBS better; asking for help at the Saloon bar will get you help (or apathy, if it's an uninteresting pseudoscience).

General SBS article structure

"[Article Title]" is a document by [Article Author] that attempts to argue that [Central Assertion of Article].

The following is a side-by-side rebuttal.

[Article Author]:

RationalWiki:

Topic Header 1

Steaming shit Tactless turds Festering feces

Rational response

Topic Header 2

Steaming shit Tactless turds Festering feces

Rational response

Subtopic Header 2.1

Steaming shit Tactless turds Festering feces

Rational response

Subtopic Header 2.2

Steaming shit Tactless turds Festering feces

Rational response

Topic Header 3

Steaming shit Tactless turds Festering feces

Rational response

Final observations

Savory summary.