Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
added Wikipedia bias in treatment of the Flood
Line 6: Line 6:  
# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.
 
# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.
 
# Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades.<ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=444</ref>  But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative".<ref>Compare [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians Liberal Wikipedians] with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Conservative_Wikipedians Conservative Wikipedians]</ref>  That suggests '''Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public'''.<ref>"Liberal bias" can be defined as the ratio of liberals to conservatives in a group, such that no liberals would equate to absolute zero.  Wikipedia's ratio of 3:1 for liberals to conservatives is six times the ratio in the American public of 1:2 for liberals to conservatives.</ref>
 
# Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades.<ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=444</ref>  But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative".<ref>Compare [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians Liberal Wikipedians] with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Conservative_Wikipedians Conservative Wikipedians]</ref>  That suggests '''Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public'''.<ref>"Liberal bias" can be defined as the ratio of liberals to conservatives in a group, such that no liberals would equate to absolute zero.  Wikipedia's ratio of 3:1 for liberals to conservatives is six times the ratio in the American public of 1:2 for liberals to conservatives.</ref>
 +
# About 60% of Americans accept the account of the Great Flood in the [[Bible]].<ref>http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040216-113955-2061r.htm</ref>.  But enter "Great Flood" into Wikipedia and it automatically converts that to an entry entitled "Deluge (mythology)."  That entry then uses "myth" or "mythology" nearly 70 times in its description.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Flood</ref>
 
# Wikipedia editors are about 4 times as atheistic or non-religious as the American public.  In a Newsweek poll in 2006, 92% of Americans said they believed in God and only 8% said they did not believe in God or didn't know.  But among Wikipedia editors responding to a request for identification of beliefs, 35% described themselves in the categories of "No religion, atheist, agnostic, humanist, secular, other."<ref>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikimedians_by_religion</ref>
 
# Wikipedia editors are about 4 times as atheistic or non-religious as the American public.  In a Newsweek poll in 2006, 92% of Americans said they believed in God and only 8% said they did not believe in God or didn't know.  But among Wikipedia editors responding to a request for identification of beliefs, 35% described themselves in the categories of "No religion, atheist, agnostic, humanist, secular, other."<ref>http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikimedians_by_religion</ref>
 
# Wikipedia's entry on [[abortion]] reads like a brochure for the abortion industry.  Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/malec.pdf</ref>  Wikipedia's entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf</ref>.  Instead of providing these facts, Wikipedia blames women by declaring that "breast cancer elicits disproportionate fear in women"!<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion-breast_cancer_hypothesis</ref>
 
# Wikipedia's entry on [[abortion]] reads like a brochure for the abortion industry.  Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/malec.pdf</ref>  Wikipedia's entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf</ref>.  Instead of providing these facts, Wikipedia blames women by declaring that "breast cancer elicits disproportionate fear in women"!<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion-breast_cancer_hypothesis</ref>
Anthony, Irenaeus, Siteadmin, apieditor, Bureaucrats, Check users, nsAm_Govt_101RO, nsAm_Govt_101RW, nsAm_Govt_101_ta, nsJudgesRO, nsJudgesRW, nsJudges_talkRO, nsJudges_talkRW, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
126,256

edits

Navigation menu