Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, Moderators, move, protect, rollback, Administrators
27,336
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 25:
Line 25: − + Line 79:
Line 79: − − I've never witnessed so much (sweeping) generalisation and bias in an Encyclopedia article. − I know this is Conservapedia, but if you want to be taken seriously you need to be UNBIASED. I see nothing but bias and emotionally charged narrative in this article. It's actually quite comical! Thank you for the entertainment, Conservapedia.
Reverted edits by Cptstubing (talk) to last revision by Conservative
== This Article is so flawed it makes my head spin ==
== This Article is so flawed it makes my head spin ==
Problems with this page in order and how to fix them:
Problems with this page in order and how to fix them:
'''1. The article's definition of a liberal''' "A liberal is a person who's views reject traditional and biblical standards in favour of subjective or relative standards." is baseless. It has no station nor can i find this definition anywhere else on the internet. I would suggest using a definition from the Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy (online)
'''1. The article's definition of a liberal''' "A liberal is a person who's views reject traditional and biblical standards in favour of subjective or relative standards." is baseless. It has no station nor can i find this definition anywhere else on the internet. I would suggest using a definition from the Stanford encyclopedia of Philosophy (online)
'''2. list of so called political positions and practices'''
'''2. list of so called political positions and practices'''
Is that an encyclopedic definition, suitable for an educational resource? I am not going to make any changes, because I do not want to be banned, but I can suggest a general definition for a leftist: "Someone who supports a more egalitarian distribution of wealth". I think all leftists agree with that. Now, as a conservative encyclopedia, you can and should explain the disadvantages of liberalism in the article, but it should also have an objective definition in the first place. --[[User:Quetzalcoatl|Quetzalcoatl]] 20:20, 5 August 2009 (EDT)
Is that an encyclopedic definition, suitable for an educational resource? I am not going to make any changes, because I do not want to be banned, but I can suggest a general definition for a leftist: "Someone who supports a more egalitarian distribution of wealth". I think all leftists agree with that. Now, as a conservative encyclopedia, you can and should explain the disadvantages of liberalism in the article, but it should also have an objective definition in the first place. --[[User:Quetzalcoatl|Quetzalcoatl]] 20:20, 5 August 2009 (EDT)
:Exactly.[[User:TomUp|TomUp]] 11:10, 2 March 2013 (EST)
:Exactly.[[User:TomUp|TomUp]] 11:10, 2 March 2013 (EST)
== Picture ==
== Picture ==