4
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 115:
Line 115: − + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 13:25, June 2, 2021
, 13:25, June 2, 2021Agreed that "negative" words in many cases are not effective
== Negative Words ==
== Negative Words ==
While alot of this article is valid, alot of negative words are using. This simply makes the facts come across as angry attacks at wikipedia. Words like "vulger", "frivolous" and "blatant" aren't neccessary and make this wikipedia look very unprofessional. If anybody has any concern with the removal of these words, let me know. --[[User:Carceous|Carceous]] 08:00, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
While alot of this article is valid, alot of negative words are being used. This simply makes the facts come across as angry attacks at wikipedia. Words like "vulger", "frivolous" and "blatant" aren't neccessary and make this wikipedia look very unprofessional. If anybody has any concern with the removal of these words, let me know. --[[User:Carceous|Carceous]] 08:00, 5 June 2009 (EDT)
:: I largely agree with Carceous. My opinion has always been that it is more effective to present facts of what happened (kinda like Tucker Carlson) rather than express negative opinions (kinda like Sean Hannity). Readers and listeners form their own opinions. I fully understand the desire to call the *#@## that wikipedia engages in *#@## and sometimes do so myself. But I feel it is not as effective. [[User:JocelynBey1|JocelynBey1]]
===Racistpedia===
===Racistpedia===