Block, SkipCaptcha
195
edits
Changes
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 02:35, October 27, 2008
, 02:35, October 27, 2008→Disagreeing with this article
::If you try to blame Wikipedia for being liberally biased, all you are doing is blaming the editors, who, invariably, have different opinions. WP cannot be blamed for the stuff that gets put on it, since WP does not put it on there, editors do. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 12:13, 5 August 2008 (EDT)
::If you try to blame Wikipedia for being liberally biased, all you are doing is blaming the editors, who, invariably, have different opinions. WP cannot be blamed for the stuff that gets put on it, since WP does not put it on there, editors do. [[User:Jedibob5|Jedibob5]] 12:13, 5 August 2008 (EDT)
:::Just because everyone subjectively '''thinks''' that they are right (after all, how can one possibly believe something and simultaneuously consider that believe wrong?) that doesn't make right and wrong subjective. Some issues truly can be called matters of opinion (i.e. not right or wrong, and no real "incorrect" either). However the "conservative" position (& therefore CP's '''acknowledged''' position) is that right & wrong are objective, absolute issues. The "liberal" position of existentialism (which you apparently subscribe to) is ''practiced'' on WP but not acknowledged. Ironically, subscribing to the existenitalist/subjective view disallows you from disagreeing with conservative/objective view.
:::Also, you idealise WP somewhat - and reveal a sizable dose of naivetee - if you truly believe what you posted about "consensus" and "no has got around to fixing it". As one who has seriously attempted to "fix it" and to build consensus I can tell you that that is simply not how WP works, which is what most of the items in this article demonstrate. You also falsely separate WP from its editors; WP ''is'' the body of its editors/admins/oversight. They write the articles, they write the guidelines, they write the policies, they mediate and arbitrate disputes, they grant and remove editor rights.[[User:LowKey|LowKey]] 22:35, 26 October 2008 (EDT)
==Baraminology==
==Baraminology==
"The Wikipedia entry on baraminology (a form of taxonomy) describes it as "pseudoscience" and "unrelated to science" simply because it was devised by a creationist. [6]"
"The Wikipedia entry on baraminology (a form of taxonomy) describes it as "pseudoscience" and "unrelated to science" simply because it was devised by a creationist. [6]"