SkipCaptcha
26
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 10:
Line 10: + +
Debate:Is Conservapedia a 'Trustworthy Encyclopedia'? (view source)
Revision as of 06:58, February 9, 2013
, 06:58, February 9, 2013→FOR
Yes, I have found Conservapedia constantly improving with filling out information and removing imbedded vandalism from its early days when there wasn't as much checking. I read a comment from many months ago complaining that there were no internal links between articles - now, that's largely a complaint of the past. While some areas are sparse, the information presented is accurate. It also gives a conservative view that is often not allowed in other forums and as such provides an important source for information that could be difficult to find otherwise. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:48, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
Yes, I have found Conservapedia constantly improving with filling out information and removing imbedded vandalism from its early days when there wasn't as much checking. I read a comment from many months ago complaining that there were no internal links between articles - now, that's largely a complaint of the past. While some areas are sparse, the information presented is accurate. It also gives a conservative view that is often not allowed in other forums and as such provides an important source for information that could be difficult to find otherwise. [[User:Learn together|Learn together]] 11:48, 14 August 2007 (EDT)
I think that, while Conservapedia is far from being trustworthy on all subjects, it certainly provides information that the majority of Americans would trust more. So yes, it is way more trustworthy than other wikis. [[User:DMorrow|DMorrow]] 01:58, 9 February 2013 (EST)
== AGAINST ==
== AGAINST ==