58
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 37:
Line 37: + +
Debate:Bias in conservapedia (view source)
Revision as of 00:50, January 4, 2008
, 00:50, January 4, 2008→Examples of Bias in Conservapedia
15. There are many more examples of these biased articles, all you have to do is look around. I encourage others who are outraged at the complete inaccuracy of these articles, and complete lack of anything even remotely non-Christian, non-Creationist, non-Conservative, and non-American, to add more examples to this list to show that Conservapedia is much more biased than Wikipedia, which it is attempting to "fix".
15. There are many more examples of these biased articles, all you have to do is look around. I encourage others who are outraged at the complete inaccuracy of these articles, and complete lack of anything even remotely non-Christian, non-Creationist, non-Conservative, and non-American, to add more examples to this list to show that Conservapedia is much more biased than Wikipedia, which it is attempting to "fix".
16. Conservapedia argues against Wikipedia on the basis that when discussing political candidates it tends to contain information that presents conservative politicians in a negative light while ignoring similar information for liberal politicians. Conservapedia has the same modus operandi but in reverse and to the extreme. If one looks at the Hillary Clinton page, most of the information there discusses scandals or failures but does not provide any examples of accomplishments. The page on Mike Huckabee is entirely positive and had no information about recent information until an informed individual added it. Conservapedia fails to present all politicians in equally positive and negative light.