7
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 156:
Line 156: + + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 01:13, April 15, 2008
, 01:13, April 15, 2008no edit summary
: Tommy, your objection is not clear and you seem to be missing the flaw in Wikipedia's biased claim. Your point about the religious seems completely unrelated to your other point. Be clear, and I'll respond, but demonstrate that understand the flaw in Wikipedia's analysis or else I may not waste my time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
: Tommy, your objection is not clear and you seem to be missing the flaw in Wikipedia's biased claim. Your point about the religious seems completely unrelated to your other point. Be clear, and I'll respond, but demonstrate that understand the flaw in Wikipedia's analysis or else I may not waste my time.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:21, 8 April 2008 (EDT)
== Obvious bias in liberal page ==
Did anybody else notice that in the "See Also" section for [[Liberal]], there are a ton of links, with most of them being negative (to the point of extremity and nitpickiness such as [[Liberal Celebrity Obsession]] or [[Liberal Myths]], while the same section for [[Conservative]] has only three links, none of them which are remotely negative?
--[[User:Blabberno|Blabberno]] 21:13, 14 April 2008 (EDT)