Changes

== Liberal Wikipedians as compared to conservative Wikipedians ==

== Liberal Wikipedians as compared to conservative Wikipedians ==

The referenced links only represent an extremely small percentage of Wikipedia\\\'s total membership. This really invalidates it, and I would remove that particular point if I didn\\\'t fear the consequences. [[User:Linus M.|Geekman314]]^{([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])} 13:38, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

The referenced links only represent an extremely small percentage of Wikipedia's total membership. This really invalidates it, and I would remove that particular point if I didn't fear the consequences. [[User:Linus M.|Geekman314]]^{([[User talk:Linus M.|contact me]])} 13:38, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:Fear not, you couldn\\\'t remove it anyway: The article is protected. And this issue has been mentioned a few times by now, with the most prominent one (in my eyes) being in [[#We need to decide what this list is|We need to decide what this list is]]. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 15:35, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:Fear not, you couldn't remove it anyway: The article is protected. And this issue has been mentioned a few times by now, with the most prominent one (in my eyes) being in [[#We need to decide what this list is|We need to decide what this list is]]. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 15:35, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Folks, all polls or sample sizes are \\\"an extremely small percentage\\\" of the population.  That does not make it invalid.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:11, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:: Folks, all polls or sample sizes are "an extremely small percentage" of the population.  That does not make it invalid.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 17:11, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

::: It does. The Harris poll was contained from a statistical significant sample of 6,000 people, and the results were weighted for sex, education, age, etc to have the outcome match the general population.  Also, it had 3 possible answers: conservative, moderate, liberal.  

::: It does. The Harris poll was contained from a statistical significant sample of 6,000 people, and the results were weighted for sex, education, age, etc to have the outcome match the general population.  Also, it had 3 possible answers: conservative, moderate, liberal.  

:::The wikipedia numbers are based on a selfselected sample of about 300 people who felt like putting political orientation into their profile. This sample is unlikely to be representative for the 3.8 million wikipedians. Even if your guts tell you that a rate 3 to 1 liberal is close to reality. Its your guts that say this, because these numbers don\\\'t prove anything. These numbers are not corrected for age, sex, education. And there are only two choices: liberal, and conservative (in contrast to 3). And the way you compute with fractions is even fundamentally flawed, even if the numbers were right and significant, but that a different issue altogether.

:::The wikipedia numbers are based on a selfselected sample of about 300 people who felt like putting political orientation into their profile. This sample is unlikely to be representative for the 3.8 million wikipedians. Even if your guts tell you that a rate 3 to 1 liberal is close to reality. Its your guts that say this, because these numbers don't prove anything. These numbers are not corrected for age, sex, education. And there are only two choices: liberal, and conservative (in contrast to 3). And the way you compute with fractions is even fundamentally flawed, even if the numbers were right and significant, but that a different issue altogether.

:::: No, the sample is not merely 300 people in the Wikipedia.  It\\\'s thousands, or millions, of which well over 300 people responded.  It is MORE reliable than a poll that only contacts a few hundred people.  The Wikipedia survey is like an election, where people have the option of voting or not voting.  That is MORE accurate than a telephone poll that does not expressly give people that option.

:::: No, the sample is not merely 300 people in the Wikipedia.  It's thousands, or millions, of which well over 300 people responded.  It is MORE reliable than a poll that only contacts a few hundred people.  The Wikipedia survey is like an election, where people have the option of voting or not voting.  That is MORE accurate than a telephone poll that does not expressly give people that option.

:::::\\\'\\\'What survey?\\\'\\\' Nowhere on Wikipedia does ANYBODY go all \\\"Hey, if you like, you can add these silly labels to your userpage!\\\". Few people know of this category, fewer people are Americans who these labels apply to, even fewer people care enough about them. Jimmy Wales himself said that he discourages these things, so EVEN fewer people will slap one of those things onto their pages. Your \\\"survey\\\" is like me setting up a poll on a site somewhere and then not advertising it. My sample size automatically becomes \\\"All users of the Internet\\\", and that makes it a valid survey. If just ten people reply, it won\\\'t matter since millions of people participated - they just chose not to take the poll.

:::::''What survey?'' Nowhere on Wikipedia does ANYBODY go all "Hey, if you like, you can add these silly labels to your userpage!". Few people know of this category, fewer people are Americans who these labels apply to, even fewer people care enough about them. Jimmy Wales himself said that he discourages these things, so EVEN fewer people will slap one of those things onto their pages. Your "survey" is like me setting up a poll on a site somewhere and then not advertising it. My sample size automatically becomes "All users of the Internet", and that makes it a valid survey. If just ten people reply, it won't matter since millions of people participated - they just chose not to take the poll.

:::::Look, I know you\\\'re very proud of this claim, but let it go. You have no basis for stating that Wikipedia is more of ANYTHING. These things are no poll, no survey, no anything. You\\\'ve had your fun, the press in one or two countries at least made fun of it, but that\\\'s it. Keeping it in will only show that you\\\'re stubborn even in the face of people openly mocking it. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 22:07, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::::Look, I know you're very proud of this claim, but let it go. You have no basis for stating that Wikipedia is more of ANYTHING. These things are no poll, no survey, no anything. You've had your fun, the press in one or two countries at least made fun of it, but that's it. Keeping it in will only show that you're stubborn even in the face of people openly mocking it. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 22:07, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

::: Since this is the only \\\'\\\'\\\'bold\\\'\\\'\\\' statement in the entire article on bias in Wikipedia, it better be right. However, it is wrong on so many levels. The only thing that speaks for it that it coincides with your gut feeling. It is a gift to any liberal who wants to ridicule Conservapedia and its editors. Its like starting a football match and giving away penalty kicks to the opponents.  --[[User:Order|Order]] 10:03, 14 March 2007 (AEST)

::: Since this is the only '''bold''' statement in the entire article on bias in Wikipedia, it better be right. However, it is wrong on so many levels. The only thing that speaks for it that it coincides with your gut feeling. It is a gift to any liberal who wants to ridicule Conservapedia and its editors. Its like starting a football match and giving away penalty kicks to the opponents.  --[[User:Order|Order]] 10:03, 14 March 2007 (AEST)

:::: This debate illustrates how the problem is more than the fact that Wikipedia is liberal.  It is that Wikipedians won\\\'t admit they are liberal.  That\\\'s what makes Conservapedia so much better.  We\\\'re up-front about our point-of-view.  Liberal Wikipedians pretend they are not liberal, when they are.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:42, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

:::: This debate illustrates how the problem is more than the fact that Wikipedia is liberal.  It is that Wikipedians won't admit they are liberal.  That's what makes Conservapedia so much better.  We're up-front about our point-of-view.  Liberal Wikipedians pretend they are not liberal, when they are.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 21:42, 13 March 2007 (EDT)

 

== How are we supposed to contribute? ==

== How are we supposed to contribute? ==