541
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 682:
Line 682: + + +
→SOME positive aspects of WP?
Maybe we can divide this article into general information of interest - such as the license and the ease of editing - and the strenuous criticism of its leftist bias and general unreliability. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 20:41, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
Maybe we can divide this article into general information of interest - such as the license and the ease of editing - and the strenuous criticism of its leftist bias and general unreliability. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 20:41, 10 October 2007 (EDT)
:A great idea! We'll call the former [[Wikipedia]] and the latter [[Examples of Bias in Wikipedia]]! ...no, wait... ;)
:Seriously, though, it's nice that a sysop finally (implicitly) admits that practically the entire article is just pointing out how bad WP is and that good/neutral info is so rare that it practically sticks out. This article is to Wikipedia what [[Theory of Evolution]] is to evolution: Little actual info, tons of preaching how it's bad and shouldn't be trusted. I fully support the idea of having an actual article about Wikipedia. --[[User:Jenkins|Jenkins]] 21:11, 10 October 2007 (EDT)