Examples of Bias in Wikipedia: Anti-Christianity

This article lists examples of Bias in Wikipedia, related to Anti-Christianity and favoritism to other religions/atheism:

1. Wikipedia has a lengthy entry on "Jesus H. Christ," a term that is an idiotic mockery of the Christian faith. Wikipedia calls the term "often humorous," "joking" and "comedic", and relishes in repeating disrespectful uses of the term, without admitting that the phrase is an anti-Christian mockery. Meanwhile, Wikipedia does not describe mockery of any other religion as "humorous".
2. Arguments for atheism are prominently featured in Wikipedia's atheism article, but Wikipedia's Christianity article does not mention Christian apologetics.
3. Wikipedia has millions of obscure entries, but deletes or omits entries about conservatives and/or Christians. For example, conservative congressional candidate Ruth McClung has no entry at all on Wikipedia, despite being far more notable than many of its entries; likewise, broadcaster Al Gross's entry has been tagged for deletion despite having a notable and continuing career in broadcasting.
4. Wikipedia's article on Westminster Theological Seminary demonstrates its anti-Christian bias when it states "with the vision of continuing the theological tradition of Princeton Theological Seminary in a militant and explicitly polemical manner, from which the Westminster founders felt Princeton was departing."
5. It's apparently okay to cast doubt on well-known evangelical Christian's claims of being former atheists, as was recently done repeatedly to Kirk Cameron's Wikipedia article, but similar edits regarding claims made by famous atheists of being former Christians would never be tolerated (e.g. PZ Myers' Wikipedia article).
6. Wikipedia's article on the French Revolution censors the central role atheism played in causing the mass murders of the Reign of Terror.
7. Wikipedia omits an entry on Biblical scientific foreknowledge, and instead ignores the foreknowledge with a pathetically abbreviated section entitled "History and advocacy" under "Scientific foreknowledge in sacred texts."
8. Wikipedia's article on Thanksgiving is a clearcut attempt to mitigate the meaning of Thanksgiving; from giving thanks to God as the holiday is meant to be, and instead changing history by claiming the day has become a politically correct "secular holiday." Wikipedia's political correctness is an attempt to change truth in order to appeal more closely with atheists.
9. Isaac Newton translated parts of the Bible, and considered this effort to be the source of his scientific insights, yet Wikipedia's 10,000-word entry completely omits this.
10. Wikipedia uses anti-religious examples for its entry on "argumentum ad populum" (Latin for claiming that something is true if it is popular). Conspicuously absent from Wikipedia's examples are atheistic arguments based on popular opinion, such as misleading people into thinking the theory of evolution must be true if others accept it.
11. Wikipedia's article about Bernhard Riemann, perhaps the greatest modern mathematician, contains little discussion of Riemann's faith and tries to downplay his fundamentalism as though it were merely a passing interest as a teenager.
12. In its entry on the heavily Christian Gothic architecture, Wikipedia credits Islam before Christianity, does not even mention Christianity until after more than 1500 words, and then does not mention Christianity again.
13. Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that American atheists give significantly less to charity than American theists on a per capita basis even when church giving is not counted for theists. In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention how key proponents of atheism have been deceptive. Wikipedia's article on atheism also fails to mention that Christianity and not atheism was foundational in regards to the development of modern science. Wikipedia's article attempts to associate atheism with scientific progress. In addition, Wikipedia's article on atheism fails to mention that atheism is a causal factor for suicide.
14. Wikipedia's entry about the Christian martyr at Columbine refuses to admit that she was murdered by an atheist as she was expressing her faith in God, as confirmed by multiple witnesses. Wikipedia is dominated by atheistic public school students who would be particularly biased against this truth.
    • Version of May 12, 2009:

      Initial reports suggested that one of the assailants, either Eric Harris or Dylan Klebold, asked Bernall if she believed in God moments before fatally shooting her. She was reported to have answered "yes". [1]

15. Despite extensive evidence for the existence of God, Wikipedia lists theism as an example of the so-called Tinkerbell effect.
16. Wikipedia contains no information on the link between atheism and obesity or the New Atheism leadership's problems with being overweight.
17. Arguments for atheism are prominently featured in Wikipedia's atheism article, but Wikipedia's Christianity article does not mention Christian apologetics.
18. The Wikipedia entry on baraminology (a form of taxonomy) describes it as "pseudoscience" and "unrelated to science" simply because it is based on the Holy Bible.
19. A user named Richard Dawkins apparently edited his own article on Wikipedia, and even linked to a DVD being sold from his personal website. Illustrating Wikipedia's favoritism towards liberals, it took a long time (well over a year after he first edited his own article) for anybody to confront this well-known atheist for this conflict of interest, despite being against Wikipedia's own rules.
20. Wikipedia's entry for Johnny Appleseed, a Christian folk hero, omits a discussion of his strong faith and instead features baseless speculation about his health, a year of death different from that of his obituary, and a silly story designed to make a Christian preacher look foolish.
21. Wikipedia's entries about the 2007 Masters and its champion Zach Johnson, who won an upset come-from-behind victory against Tiger Woods, omitted any reference to Johnson's public statements crediting his faith in Jesus Christ for strengthening him as he overcame enormous odds to prevail. Months later, after criticism here, Johnson's attribution to Jesus Christ was included, but with the Wikipedia trick of placing it late in a wordy entry so that few are likely to see it, and even then with a silly "citation needed" to suggest that the quote may not be true.