Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
20,682
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
mLine 134:
Line 134: − − There is, luckily, no way whatsoever of that happening, the reason why this will never happen is the same reason it would be terrible, this site is incredably biased towards the oppinion of some conservative exremist morons. Also CE is an acceptable (not good, just acceptable) system of expressing years, any overtly religious method is not. Now if you'll excuse me I've got some vandalising to do. [[User:Someprogresivedude|Someprogresivedude]] 09:55, 29 October 2009 (EDT) −
Debate:Can conservapedia become the next Wikipedia, is this good or bad (view source)
Revision as of 14:28, October 29, 2009
, 14:28, October 29, 2009Reverted edits by Someprogresivedude (Talk) to last version by Ed Poor
Summary... If you can present both sides of the topic in an intelligent manner with several citations, people will be more apt to use this site. Otherwise it will become a haven for extremists and fall off the map of every day people with conservative views.--[[User:KevinSSr|KevinSSr]] 22:34, 4 December 2008 (EST)
Summary... If you can present both sides of the topic in an intelligent manner with several citations, people will be more apt to use this site. Otherwise it will become a haven for extremists and fall off the map of every day people with conservative views.--[[User:KevinSSr|KevinSSr]] 22:34, 4 December 2008 (EST)
==View from a longtime Wikipedian==
==View from a longtime Wikipedian==