1
edit
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 533:
Line 533: + + + + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 23:37, March 13, 2007
, 23:37, March 13, 2007"Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public"
::: Exactly. If someone who agrees with my political philosophy is using obviously incorrect logic to prove their point, that makes me look worse by comparison. The math is incorrect, and saying that is isn't make it so.
::: Exactly. If someone who agrees with my political philosophy is using obviously incorrect logic to prove their point, that makes me look worse by comparison. The math is incorrect, and saying that is isn't make it so.
Based on the above stated information, the Wikipedia survey is not representative as the basic assumption for statistical validity (random selection, or precise stratification) is violated. However, let us assume it is valid and forget about the math, then next question arising will be:
what is the point?
It is common knowledge that Americans tend to be more conservative than the average world citizen. But why should the American public be particularly relevant to Wikipedia, which extends far beyond America?
The idea that it is a bias if Wikipedia's authors do not mirror the American public, seems to reveal a narrow and ethnocentric scope of the authors behind "Conservapedia". A bias which Wikipedia (thank God) does not seem to have.
==Item 12==
==Item 12==