Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
20,682
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 238:
Line 238: + +
Debate:Can conservapedia become the next Wikipedia, is this good or bad (view source)
Revision as of 04:44, June 21, 2009
, 04:44, June 21, 2009reply
No, it cannot. CP's ideological bias is deliberate and overt, as opposed to Wikipedia's emergent, incidental bias, which undermines the average reader's confidence in CP's information. Wikipedia may be editable by anyone, but CP is guaranteed to contain information that advances a conservative agenda. If there existed a Liberalpedia, it would be just as untrustworthy, but Wikipedia is not such a being. On the day it institutes a "Conservative Tricks" page, we'll talk. -- [[User:Osiris1723|Osiris1723]] 00:31, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
No, it cannot. CP's ideological bias is deliberate and overt, as opposed to Wikipedia's emergent, incidental bias, which undermines the average reader's confidence in CP's information. Wikipedia may be editable by anyone, but CP is guaranteed to contain information that advances a conservative agenda. If there existed a Liberalpedia, it would be just as untrustworthy, but Wikipedia is not such a being. On the day it institutes a "Conservative Tricks" page, we'll talk. -- [[User:Osiris1723|Osiris1723]] 00:31, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:Incidental bias, what a lovely word. Maybe you would think different if you read http://www.conservapedia.com/Bias_in_Wikipedia They have the most pages on the internet, clap clap clap. I truly believe they have the most anti-God pages as well. --[[User:Jpatt|Jpatt]] 00:44, 21 June 2009 (EDT)