1
edit
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 243:
Line 243: + + +
Debate:Can conservapedia become the next Wikipedia, is this good or bad (view source)
Revision as of 19:05, December 9, 2009
, 19:05, December 9, 2009no edit summary
: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)
: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)
:::::Likeminded people who agree with Osirus1723, where is the external link section of Wikipedia's Criticism of atheism article located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism Why don't you test your hypothesis that the ideological bias at Wikipedia is incidental? Test it as soon as you read this message by adding a external link section to the Wikipedia criticism of atheism article located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 05:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
:::::Likeminded people who agree with Osirus1723, where is the external link section of Wikipedia's Criticism of atheism article located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism Why don't you test your hypothesis that the ideological bias at Wikipedia is incidental? Test it as soon as you read this message by adding a external link section to the Wikipedia criticism of atheism article located here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_atheism [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 05:04, 21 June 2009 (EDT)
I am still new to this site, but here is the conclusion I have drawn thus far: Based on the limit on languages, the extreme censorship, the locking of articles, the narrow-minded bias, etc., I am pretty sure this site is made BY FASCISTS, FOR FASCISTS. That is the only explaination I can think of. I am willing to listen to, and accept, the views of other people even if I don't agree with them, only if they listen to, and accept, my views even if they don't agree with them. This is NOT a place for intelligent debate, conversation, and learning. And as far as the claim of Wikipedia's liberal bias: It is edited by users. As is this site. However, it is not called Liberalipedia. This is Conservapedia, clearly saying that this site can't be trusted since people use opinion rather than fact. Good luck to all!