nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW
26,487
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 340:
Line 340: − +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 02:02, September 17, 2007
, 02:02, September 17, 2007→Wikipedia has been called by some the National Enquirer of the Internet?
:::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)
:::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)
*It is apparent some editors are more interested in defending anything and everything that even hints at denigrating Wikipedia. Under the guise of "protecting" CP's integrity, they seek to "soften" the points being made for fear of what? Taking a conservative POV, and calling a spade a spade? That reference to Wikipedia has been around since WP started, in blogs, newspaper and television, politicians and web masters. Headlines, for comparative lists, which is what "Examples" is, do not need sources. At least not in scholarly circles, for lists are not scholarly articles. At least this list is properly sourced, and comparisons provided. These constant nit-picks, liberal-like parsing of words (worthy of Bill Clinton!) and plaintive edit notes have become an embarrassment to read. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 22:00, 16 September 2007 (EDT)
*It is apparent some editors are more interested in removing anything and everything that even hints at denigrating Wikipedia. Under the guise of "protecting" CP's integrity, they seek to "soften" the points being made for fear of what? Taking a conservative POV, and calling a spade a spade? That reference to Wikipedia has been around since WP started, in blogs, newspaper and television, politicians and web masters. Headlines, for comparative lists, which is what "Examples" is, do not need sources. At least not in scholarly circles, for lists are not scholarly articles. At least this list is properly sourced, and comparisons provided. These constant nit-picks, liberal-like parsing of words (worthy of Bill Clinton!) and plaintive edit notes have become an embarrassment to read. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 22:00, 16 September 2007 (EDT)