88
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 172:
Line 172: +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 02:19, March 17, 2007
, 02:19, March 17, 2007→Robert McHenry: please do a bit of research
:'''REPLY:''' Not true. The admin who deleted the conservapedia entry on Wikipedia did NOT explain his action. Some said it was because most (not all) of the comments favored deletion. But then defenders of Wikipedia claim it is not majority-rule. So which is it? Majority rule or reasoned basis for actions? For it to be a reasoned basis for action, the reason must be given by the person taking the action.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:33, 18 February 2007 (EST)
:'''REPLY:''' Not true. The admin who deleted the conservapedia entry on Wikipedia did NOT explain his action. Some said it was because most (not all) of the comments favored deletion. But then defenders of Wikipedia claim it is not majority-rule. So which is it? Majority rule or reasoned basis for actions? For it to be a reasoned basis for action, the reason must be given by the person taking the action.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 18:33, 18 February 2007 (EST)
:: the idea of the article's for deletion policy is for the admin to make a judgement based on wikipedia's policies (its constitutions) and guidlelines (its style guides) and consensus ( the various editor's opinions on the topic). This policy works some times and doesn't work sometimes. We shouldn't take it perosnally here. Its shocking to me that conservapedia attacks wikipedia in this artilce without really knowing much about it. Not that it matters but, as it stands this article is misleading at best. [[User:Godman|Godman]] 22:19, 16 March 2007 (EDT)
== "Why doesn't Wikipedia survey these editors?" ==
== "Why doesn't Wikipedia survey these editors?" ==