Changes

2.  The entry for the Renaissance in Wikipedia refuses to give any credit to Christianity.

2.  The entry for the Renaissance in Wikipedia refuses to give any credit to Christianity.

3.  Wikipedia has an administrator who edits under the names "Nearly Headless Nick" and "Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington."  His own user page says he "died on October 31, 1492 and is the resident ghost of Gryffindor tower."  Wikipedia grants administrative privileges to editors with frivolous names like these?!<ref>When an article on Conservapedia was contributed to Wikipedia, there was a formal discussion[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Conservapedia] of whether it should be deleted. This administrator was the one who made the final judgement that the outcome of the discussion was that there was rough consensus for deletion, and performed the actual deletion of the article.</ref>

3.  Wikipedia has an administrator who edits under the names "Nearly Headless Nick" and "Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington."  His own user page says he "died on October 31, 1492 and is the resident ghost of Gryffindor tower."  Wikipedia grants administrative privileges to editors with frivolous names like these?!<ref>When an article on Conservapedia was contributed to Wikipedia, there was a formal discussion[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Conservapedia] of whether it should be deleted. This administrator was the one who made the final judgment to delete the article. Unlike a judge or other decisionmaker, he provided no reason for his decision.  He did not explain whether it was based merely on majority vote by anonymous postings (which would be silly) or on specific rules (rules that would require immediate deletion of thousands of other Wikipedia entries) or simply on personal whim at that moment.  Hours of work and useful information was erased as a result.</ref>

4.  There is a strong anti-American and anti-capitalism bias on Wikipedia.  In its description of the post-war Bell Trade Act of 1946, in which the United States gave the Philippines $800 million in exchange for some free trade provisions, Wikipedia omits any mention of the $800 million dollars and instead lambasts the "wrath of Father Capitalism."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Trade_Act</ref>  The agreement was approved by popular vote on the Philippines, but the Wikipedia article omits that fact also.

4.  There is a strong anti-American and anti-capitalism bias on Wikipedia.  In its description of the post-war Bell Trade Act of 1946, in which the United States gave the Philippines $800 million in exchange for some free trade provisions, Wikipedia omits any mention of the $800 million dollars and instead lambasts the "wrath of Father Capitalism."<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bell_Trade_Act</ref>  The agreement was approved by popular vote on the Philippines, but the Wikipedia article omits that fact also.