35
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 28:
Line 28: + + + + + +
→Conservapedia's message
:(original message:The sarcastic tone of your edit to the Sarah Palin article [[liberal deceit|wasn't acceptable]]; you "praised" Palin in the article, but linked to a liberal website ridiculing her for the point (a site which you acknowledged was liberal [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Huffington_Post&oldid=785188 here]). Constructive edits are welcome here, but be mindful of what constructive means. We are constructing an encyclopedia from the conservative perspective. (Also, on a lighter note: please always review your edit after you've made it - you left out a <nowiki>start <ref></nowiki> tag)--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 12:23, 5 June 2010 (EDT))
:(original message:The sarcastic tone of your edit to the Sarah Palin article [[liberal deceit|wasn't acceptable]]; you "praised" Palin in the article, but linked to a liberal website ridiculing her for the point (a site which you acknowledged was liberal [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Huffington_Post&oldid=785188 here]). Constructive edits are welcome here, but be mindful of what constructive means. We are constructing an encyclopedia from the conservative perspective. (Also, on a lighter note: please always review your edit after you've made it - you left out a <nowiki>start <ref></nowiki> tag)--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 12:23, 5 June 2010 (EDT))
:: We point out the flaws in the liberal perspective that those publications endorse. And that still doesn't explain you using a source criticizing Palin while praising Palin in the article.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 11:29, 6 June 2010 (EDT)
:: We point out the flaws in the liberal perspective that those publications endorse. And that still doesn't explain you using a source criticizing Palin while praising Palin in the article.--<small>[[User:Iduan|<span style="color: #FFCCCC; background: #660000">I]][[User_talk:Iduan|<span style="color:#CCCCFF; background:#000033">Duan]]</span></span></small> 11:29, 6 June 2010 (EDT)
By no means did I ever acknowledge any political leanings that the Huffington Post might have had. Rather, I used Conservapedia's own opinion set forth in the website's article about the Huffington Post [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Talk:Huffington_Post&oldid=785188 here], not my own personal beliefs about the website. In fact, I don't believe I even used the word "liberal" or anything connoting it in the above link. That one's on you.
Secondly, Palin doesn't deserve to be praised for much. I'm a fan of the old guard conservatives--Ronald Reagan, the Buckleys, the Goldwaters, Bush, Sr.. If the Conservative party is going to band together behind the likes of Palin, I'm not sure it's a party I want to adhere to anymore. And while the rebut may be that Conservapedia stands behind her, Conservapedians as a whole represent a mere fraction of the conservative intellectual population.
And in all honesty, I am appreciating the intellectual sparring match we are having.