Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
→‎What kind?: What's the problem?
Line 26: Line 26:     
Also, this thing doesn't deserve to be called an encyclopedia. It's full of bias. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is full of what the editors here call "liberal bias", which is just neutrality policy... just goes to show that this "conservapedia" os not worth the suffix "-pedia".--[[User:Materialist|Materialist]] 13:16, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
 
Also, this thing doesn't deserve to be called an encyclopedia. It's full of bias. Wikipedia, on the other hand, is full of what the editors here call "liberal bias", which is just neutrality policy... just goes to show that this "conservapedia" os not worth the suffix "-pedia".--[[User:Materialist|Materialist]] 13:16, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:Wikipedia claims to be neutral but is riddle with bias.  Conservapedia doesn't claim to be neutral, but to be conservative.  What's the problem?  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:09, 16 May 2007 (EDT)
    
== WHAT? ==
 
== WHAT? ==
nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW
13,254

edits

Navigation menu