12
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 79:
Line 79: + +
Colbert Report Viewers (view source)
Revision as of 01:45, December 14, 2009
, 01:45, December 14, 2009→Wikipedia is helpful
::Which anecdote did you find credible? I'm seen some claims but found them lacking in specifics, and thus I did not find them to be credible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:21, 12 December 2009 (EST)
::Which anecdote did you find credible? I'm seen some claims but found them lacking in specifics, and thus I did not find them to be credible.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 20:21, 12 December 2009 (EST)
:::What sort of specifics would you like? Would you like me to name the time and place that I had a question, looked it up on Wikipedia, found the answer and the citation, and that this information helped me, as a student, achieve a qualification? I would quite happily provide this information, and so would many others, but I think you would dismiss our claims as being contrary to your world view and therefore untrue. If you would like my example, and if it would dissuade you of apparently singular state of mind then please ask.
I guess our differences come down to whether having more information is a good thing. Personally, I find the math articles on Conservapedia to generally be incredibly lacking. If all you want is a definition of a term then sure, a one sentence article is acceptable, but if you actually want to learn, it is near worthless. Imagine if the article on George Washington only said "George Washington was the first president of the United States. He was in office from 1789-1797". Sure it tells you who he was, but it doesn't tell you why he was significant. It doesn't show you how he fits in with history as a whole.
I guess our differences come down to whether having more information is a good thing. Personally, I find the math articles on Conservapedia to generally be incredibly lacking. If all you want is a definition of a term then sure, a one sentence article is acceptable, but if you actually want to learn, it is near worthless. Imagine if the article on George Washington only said "George Washington was the first president of the United States. He was in office from 1789-1797". Sure it tells you who he was, but it doesn't tell you why he was significant. It doesn't show you how he fits in with history as a whole.