511
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 635:
Line 635: + + + + + +
→SOME positive aspects of WP?
:: No, there's little of value in a cite as devoted to lies, gossip and pornography as [[Wikipedia]] is. What's next, you're going to insist that the National Enquirer has much redeeming value? Please.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:15, 3 October 2007 (EDT)
:: No, there's little of value in a cite as devoted to lies, gossip and pornography as [[Wikipedia]] is. What's next, you're going to insist that the National Enquirer has much redeeming value? Please.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:15, 3 October 2007 (EDT)
:::"Conservapedia is a wiki-based web encyclopedia project with the stated purpose of creating an encyclopedia written from a socially- and economically-conservative viewpoint supportive of Conservative Christianity and Young Earth creationism." <small>(from Wikipedia's intro on Conservapedia)</small>.
:::Where's the lie in the above, Aschlafy? Or is it a simple error? Or a difference in opinion. I don't know - genuinely interested. And why don't you change it?
:::Personally I don't find Wikipedia particularly dedicated to lies, gossip and pornography. Sure, it's there if you look for it, but I don't. Wikipedia has many redeeming features - it would churlish to deny it. I still maintain they should be covered in this article to lend a bit of balance. [[User:Ajkgordon|Ajkgordon]] 09:46, 3 October 2007 (EDT)