Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
292,454
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 35:
Line 35: − +
Debate:Is it okay for Conservapedia to have biased articles? (view source)
Revision as of 16:51, August 4, 2021
, 16:51, August 4, 2021→Yes
I think they should be More Honest. I also think CNN and Liberalpedia should be Honest that they are trying to Promote a Political Agena and
I think they should be More Honest. I also think CNN and Liberalpedia should be Honest that they are trying to Promote a Political Agena and
that they are Political Propaganda. I think it is fine as long as that let viewers know it. Diclamir I am not saying they should be forced to admit bias I am saying they should be Honest about their Bias .
that they are Political Propaganda. I think it is fine as long as that let viewers know it. Diclamir I am not saying they should be forced to admit bias I am saying they should be Honest about their Bias .
:Is political propaganda canceled by scientific consensus? For example, the scientific consensus that claimed [[coronvirus]] originated from people eating bats, that now seems to be stood on its head? Secondly, can a scientific consensus be political propaganda? [[User:RobSmith|RobS]]<sup>[[User talk:RobSmith|Free Kyle!]]</sup> 12:51, August 4, 2021 (EDT)
Of course it's ok. There's nothing saying that a wiki is not allowed to have bias. [[User:RaymondZ|RaymondZ]] 10:21, 28 December 2012 (EST)
Of course it's ok. There's nothing saying that a wiki is not allowed to have bias. [[User:RaymondZ|RaymondZ]] 10:21, 28 December 2012 (EST)