17,394
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 5:
Line 5: +
thin air
If this article is any reflection of the quality of articles on Conservapedia, I am simply shocked. I thought that perhaps the party of Edmund Burke might merit a decent preexisting entry in an encyclopedia intended to better represent conservative (and objective) thought. Yet this page is full of misinformation, half-truths, and simple errors in grammar/style. It was clearly not written by someone with any sort of grasp on British political history. [[User:Constance|Constance]]
If this article is any reflection of the quality of articles on Conservapedia, I am simply shocked. I thought that perhaps the party of Edmund Burke might merit a decent preexisting entry in an encyclopedia intended to better represent conservative (and objective) thought. Yet this page is full of misinformation, half-truths, and simple errors in grammar/style. It was clearly not written by someone with any sort of grasp on British political history. [[User:Constance|Constance]]
::Constance would be of a little more help by pointing to any specific erors or misinterpretations, or perhaps suggesting fresh lines of thought. As it stands the criticism is all thin air and demonstrates no competence whatever. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 22:46, 10 December 2009 (EST)