3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 250:
Line 250: + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 19:30, September 29, 2007
, 19:30, September 29, 2007→"No Entry For 'Liberal' "
*It would not be a [[deceit]] if that is what they did. But they don't, do they? And how can you speak for one million editors and say that is how it would be? Or stay, for that matter. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 19:33, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
*It would not be a [[deceit]] if that is what they did. But they don't, do they? And how can you speak for one million editors and say that is how it would be? Or stay, for that matter. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 19:33, 27 September 2007 (EDT)
::I'm also confused. Conservative, communist, fascist, libertarian, feminist, etc... all redirect to their philosophies, so how can it be said that this shows bias on Wikipedia's part? Besides, it looks like Wikipedia has actually changed it now and appears to include various definitions of liberal, including the articles <i>Social Liberalism</i> and <i>Modern American Liberalism</i>. [[User:Jelx|Jelx]] 15:30, 29 September 2007 (EDT)
== "Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D." ==
== "Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D." ==