Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:How Conservapedia Differs from Wikipedia"
m (Protected "Differences with Wikipedia": to protect against vandalism; nothing controversial here [edit=sysop:move=sysop]) |
(improved) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
4. We do not attempt to be neutral to all points of view. We are neutral to the facts. If a group is a terrorist group, then the label "terrorist" is used here but not on Wikipedia. | 4. We do not attempt to be neutral to all points of view. We are neutral to the facts. If a group is a terrorist group, then the label "terrorist" is used here but not on Wikipedia. | ||
| − | 5. We | + | 5. We allow broader reuse of our material than Wikipedia does. Wikipedia claims to allow free use of its material, but in fact it is burdensome to comply with all of Wikipedia's copyright restrictions. |
| − | 6. We do not allow liberal censorship of conservative facts | + | 6. We do not allow liberal censorship of conservative facts. Wikipedia editors who are far more liberal than the American public frequently censor factual information. Conservapedia does not censor any facts that comport with the basic [[rules]]. |
7. We allow original, properly labeled works, while Wikipedia does not. | 7. We allow original, properly labeled works, while Wikipedia does not. | ||
| + | |||
| + | 8. We respect users' control over their own talk pages as much as possible. Wikipedia treats users' own talk pages like community property belonging to everyone, and it becomes a place for Wikipedia editors to bully users. | ||
Revision as of 18:35, March 30, 2007
1. We do not allow gossip, just as a real encyclopedia avoids it.
2. We do not allow opinions of journalists to be repeated here as though they are facts. Instead, we require authoritative support. Wikipedia presents as facts numerous assertions that are based merely on journalists' (biased) opinion.
3. We do not allow obscenity, while Wikipedia has many entries unsuitable for children.
4. We do not attempt to be neutral to all points of view. We are neutral to the facts. If a group is a terrorist group, then the label "terrorist" is used here but not on Wikipedia.
5. We allow broader reuse of our material than Wikipedia does. Wikipedia claims to allow free use of its material, but in fact it is burdensome to comply with all of Wikipedia's copyright restrictions.
6. We do not allow liberal censorship of conservative facts. Wikipedia editors who are far more liberal than the American public frequently censor factual information. Conservapedia does not censor any facts that comport with the basic rules.
7. We allow original, properly labeled works, while Wikipedia does not.
8. We respect users' control over their own talk pages as much as possible. Wikipedia treats users' own talk pages like community property belonging to everyone, and it becomes a place for Wikipedia editors to bully users.