9
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 150:
Line 150: + + + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 02:56, October 3, 2009
, 02:56, October 3, 2009no edit summary
Or can we start an article (here, of course) on such themes as [[scientists with a religious motivation]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:38, 31 August 2009 (EDT)
Or can we start an article (here, of course) on such themes as [[scientists with a religious motivation]]? --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 12:38, 31 August 2009 (EDT)
==a question==
People, if you think all these things in wikipedia are biased then why not just edit them with valid sources to support your edit? seems simple enough, and if wikipedia was as pro liberal as you claim then wouldnt the conservative page be alot more smeared? it seems factual to me, if established and proven facts conflict with your ideas of the articles' subject, find something valid that challenges whichever part you find conflicts with your views, otherwise accept that your view has been proven wrong for the time being, instead of calling it liberal bias. [[User:Euaaan|Euaaan]] 22:56, 2 October 2009 (EDT)