179
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 15:
Line 15: + + +
Talk:Liberal Bias in Popular Dictionaries (view source)
Revision as of 21:51, February 25, 2009
, 21:51, February 25, 2009→Definition vs. Connotation of Liberal
::Having looked into this further I would in fact propose the deletion of this article. I have online access to the most detailed and up-to-date OED in which it does state that evolution is a theory. This is not to mention my above points and the fact that conservatism is defined. I believe all of the issues in the article have been adequately addressed and especially since it is based upon one dictionary it seems odd to keep the article. This is not to mention that nobody has provided a reasonable explanation as to why a dictionary of all things would show any significant political bias. People may dispute a few entries but that does not constitute a general bias by any means. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 15:04, 25 February 2009 (EST)
::Having looked into this further I would in fact propose the deletion of this article. I have online access to the most detailed and up-to-date OED in which it does state that evolution is a theory. This is not to mention my above points and the fact that conservatism is defined. I believe all of the issues in the article have been adequately addressed and especially since it is based upon one dictionary it seems odd to keep the article. This is not to mention that nobody has provided a reasonable explanation as to why a dictionary of all things would show any significant political bias. People may dispute a few entries but that does not constitute a general bias by any means. [[User:RobertWDP|RobertWDP]] 15:04, 25 February 2009 (EST)
*unindent* Not having the OED, I cannot verify what RobertWDP has stated regarding the evolution entry, but if it does indeed state that it is a theory, then the entry in the article really has no place. I still stand by my first entry regarding the Liberal entry. Some administrator discussion would be appreciated as to keep the article in its present state is not accurate or factual. --[[User:AndrasK|AndrasK]] 16:51, 25 February 2009 (EST)