2
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 592:
Line 592: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 01:41, March 13, 2007
, 01:41, March 13, 2007My response
I would like to dispute item 4 on the list of examples of bias. It is stated that the Renaissance was primarily inspired by Christianity. This is not the case, however; the Renaissance was a return to the values, ideas, and artistic style of pre-Christian times, specifically those of classical Greece.
I would like to dispute item 4 on the list of examples of bias. It is stated that the Renaissance was primarily inspired by Christianity. This is not the case, however; the Renaissance was a return to the values, ideas, and artistic style of pre-Christian times, specifically those of classical Greece.
== My response ==
I'm just listing what I think of these.
# So? If you were a Jew, would you be offended for people not using the Hebrew calendar? And how does wikipedia not give credit to christianity<br>
# How is this bias? Wikipedia is an encyclopedia... having an entry on it isnt bias. It does not support or oppose anti-racist mathematics.
# Again, how is this bias? It says specifically that a small number of people believe this, and is cited well. And saying that 'no credible historian makes such a claim' is both false and biased.
# There are alot of Renaissances. Look at wikipedia's article on 'Italian Renaissance'. Christianity is credited on that article.
# Why is this still here? I think its been discussed on the talk page.
# How does it read 'like a brochure for the abortion industry'?
#
# Wikipedia, like most encyclopedias, does not include articles that are insignificant. Conservapedia only recently became famous; therefore, in response to publicity, the entry was created. It makes sense. And although wikipedia's article may include 'obvious bias, numerous errors, out-of-date citations, and self-serving false statements', I could say the same for this article as well. And even if it does have out-of-date citations, why are you using them in all of the 'Wikipedia later removed this error' examples?
#
# There is no point of view. It states the opinions of others; it does not say 'JPandS is an untrustworthy, non-recommended periodical.'
# 'Out of date.'
# Using 'foreign' spellings is not bias.
# The article on Benjamin Franklin says 'A few years later, Franklin repudiated his 1725 pamphlet as an embarrassing "erratum".' Another out of date citation?
# How can you distort and omit facts at the same time? And if those are true, then that would be an error, not bias.
# How is that gossip? A famous person becoming injured isnt gossip. Would you consider Dick Cheney shooting somebody with a shotgun gossip?
Ill stop here. Feel free to respond ><