Siteadmin, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
125,795
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 336:
Line 336: + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 01:50, September 17, 2007
, 01:50, September 17, 2007→Our Banner for the article is poor. Wikipedia has been called by some the National Enquirer of the internet?: reply
: Google says that it used by many people. See [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&q=%22National+Enquirer%22+Wikipedia] which gives many different commentators making the comparison. [[User:CalebRookwood|CalebRookwood]] 21:39, 16 September 2007 (EDT)
: Google says that it used by many people. See [http://news.google.com/archivesearch?hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tab=wn&q=%22National+Enquirer%22+Wikipedia] which gives many different commentators making the comparison. [[User:CalebRookwood|CalebRookwood]] 21:39, 16 September 2007 (EDT)
::::CelebRookwood, you didn't give me a single citation showing that a reputable commentator called Wikipedia the National Enquirer of the internet but said here is Google go and find it. I don't appreciate your "Go fish" post. This article via its unsourced claims is making us look bad and Wikipedia look bad. There is simply no need for us to look bad via the Examples of Bias in Wikipedia article. It should be easy to make Wikipedia look bad without making us look bad if we only followed the Conservapedia commandments. The Conservapedia commandments state you must give your sources and everything must be true and verifiable. If it wasn't so irritating the irony of it would make me laugh about it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:45, 16 September 2007 (EDT)
::::CelebRookwood, you didn't give me a single citation showing that a reputable commentator called Wikipedia the National Enquirer of the internet but said here is Google go and find it. I don't appreciate your "Go fish" post. This article via its unsourced claims is making us look bad and Wikipedia look bad. There is simply no need for us to look bad via the Examples of Bias in Wikipedia article. It should be easy to make Wikipedia look bad without making us look bad if we only followed the Conservapedia commandments. The Conservapedia commandments state you must give your sources and everything must be true and verifiable. If it wasn't so irritating the irony of it would make me laugh about it. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 21:45, 16 September 2007 (EDT)
::: It didn't take me long to find an example: [http://conservativeeccentric.blogspot.com/2007/05/wussification-of-wikipedia.html]. In Christ,--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:50, 16 September 2007 (EDT)