| Line 7: |
Line 7: |
| | Archive below this line! Do not remove anything above this line. | | Archive below this line! Do not remove anything above this line. |
| | ========================================================================================= --> | | ========================================================================================= --> |
| − |
| |
| − | == Ubuntu Christian Edition removed from Wikipedia ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I am the developer of the [http://www.christianubuntu.com Ubuntu Christian Edition] which is a Linux distribution geared towards Christians. Recently Wikipedia removed our page and replaced it with a redirect to a list of Ubuntu based Linux derivatives. Ironically almost all of the other derivatives still have their own Wikipedia entries. They cited non-notability as the reason for the deletion/redirect. However, even they admit that this was "against the public opinion. It is also quite obvious that Ubuntu Christian Edition has gained plenty of notability to warrant its own page on Wikipedia.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Below are some links to the ongoing discussion on the Ubuntu Forums and the, now locked, AfD discussion.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=567836 Ubuntu Forums Discussion]<br />
| |
| − | [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ubuntu_Christian_Edition_%282nd_nomination%29 [Locked AfD Discussion]]
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I would really like to have this added to the Examples of Bias in Wikipedia page. I would also like to have a page for Ubuntu Christian Edition. I believe if you take a brief look you will quickly see that it deserves its own page.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Thanks, Jereme Hancock--[[User:Mhancoc7|Mhancoc7]] 22:07, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : I don't know anything about this, but suggest you post some entries here explaining what Ubuntu (what's the word mean?) is all about. Then others will revise and comment. This may be an example of bias on Wikipedia, but I'd like to hear others comment on this here. Thanks and Godspeed.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 22:41, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::Thanks, will do!--[[User:Mhancoc7|Mhancoc7]] 22:59, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | '''What is Ubuntu'''<br />
| |
| − | Ubuntu is a community developed, linux-based operating system that is perfect for laptops, desktops and servers. It contains all the applications you need - a web browser, presentation, document and spreadsheet software, instant messaging and much more. Ubuntu is free software. You can learn more about what this means by reading our licensing. <br />
| |
| − | '''What is Ubuntu Christian Edition'''<br />
| |
| − | Ubuntu Christian Edition is a free, open source operating system geared towards Christians. It is based on the popular Ubuntu Linux. Ubuntu is a complete Linux-based operating system, freely available with both community and professional support.<br />
| |
| − | '''What does Ubuntu mean?'''<br />
| |
| − | Ubuntu is an African word meaning ‘Humanity to others’, or ‘I am what I am because of who we all are’.<br />
| |
| − |
| |
| − | That is the basics. Thanks, Jereme--[[User:Mhancoc7|Mhancoc7]] 22:59, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : Sounds interesting. You might elaborate on the Christian version, and how it differs from the main version, in [[ubuntu]]. I'm intrigued.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 23:06, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − | ::So am I. I am a Linux user myself--except that I use Fedora.--[[User:TerryH|TerryH]]<sup>[[User talk:TerryH|Talk]]</sup> 23:20, 5 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | But Wikipedia deletes non-notable articles all the time. Does this really count as an example of bias in Wikipedia? I admit the bias there is often worse than I thought, but do they actually consistently discriminate against Christians? Sorry, but I think Wikipedia may have been right in this case, unless there is some evidence to show otherwise. Besides, I think they have experts about this sort of thing there (?).
| |
| − | [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 17:56, 6 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : This article was notable by their own claimed rules for notability. You can see what the article looked like [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ubuntu_Christian_Edition&oldid=162397757 here]. The article includes at least 4 sources. The deletion "discussion" can be found [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ubuntu_Christian_Edition_%282nd_nomination%29 here]. The person who deleted is a clear liberal with an anti-Christian bias. He brags on his user page that he has donated to [[GLAAD]] the organization at the forefront of gay agenda. [[User:SkipJohnson|SkipJohnson]] 11:10, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :: Are you sure about that liberal part? According to his [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alkivar#MY_ADMITTED_BIASES user page], he is a conservative libertarian, voted for Bush in '04 because he hated Bush less than Kerry, is a member of the NRA, and leans pro-life. He disclosed that he often disagrees with GLAAD, but donates because "homophobia is still rampant in the United States." He doesn't state a religion, but his edit history doesn't show a history of editing a significant number of religion-related articles, pro or anti. [[User:PostoStudanto|PostoStudanto]] 20:28, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | ::: You are saying that he gave money to further the [[homosexual agenda]] and he is somehow conservative? [[User:SkipJohnson|SkipJohnson]] 20:39, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I apologize, I think I may have too freely given Wikipedia the benefit of the doubt, yet again. There doesn't seem to have been a clear reason for deletion. Off topic, though, do you believe that deviating from standard Conservative views on even '''one''' issue automatically exempts one from being a "true conservative"? If that were the case than no wonder there are so many liberals... [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 20:54, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | : No, of course not, but giving money to GLAAD is extreme. [[User:SkipJohnson|SkipJohnson]] 21:13, 9 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | :: For closure's sake: I suppose I understand where you're coming from, then. At the very least he would be considered a highly unorthodox [[conservative]]. [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 17:16, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − | *I don't really know. Perhaps we should at least invite them to make a page here. Feebasfactor, could you set that up? --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|/Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 18:05, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| − | Sure thing. Upon reflection, they deserve it. :) [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 18:33, 13 October 2007 (EDT)
| |
| | | | |
| | == possible bias == | | == possible bias == |