Changes

The following is a growing list of examples of '''[[liberal bias]], [[deceit]], silly [[gossip]], and blatant errors on [[Wikipedia]]'''.

The following is a growing list of examples of '''[[liberal bias]], [[deceit]], silly [[gossip]], and blatant errors on [[Wikipedia]]'''.

# Wikipedia editors are bending over backwards to come up with reasons to censor the recent stories about John Edwards <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Edwards</ref>. Several sites have stories about wikipedia’s obvious liberal bias on this issue. <ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal</ref><ref>http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free</ref><ref>http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/</ref> And of course, wikipedia ''does'' mention the liberal New York Times’ poorly-researched allegations that John McCain had an affair <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_presidential_campaign%2C_2008#Alleged_inappropriate_involvement_with_lobbyists</ref> in spite of the fact that the NYT’s own ombudsman said there was “no proof” the story was true. <ref>http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiZBfIDZs3P-I5ERtItxUcQ8JwGw</ref> If Wikipedia prints the story as true, then they will be independently confirming a story reported by the ''[[National Enquirer]]'', proving that "Wikipedia is the ''National Enquirer'' of the internet!"

# Wikipedia editors are bending over backwards to come up with reasons to censor the recent stories about John Edwards <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:John_Edwards</ref>. Several sites have stories about wikipedia’s obvious liberal bias on this issue. <ref>http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/07/28/wikipedia-disallows-any-mention-alleged-john-edwards-scandal</ref><ref>http://gawker.com/5029921/john-edwards-wikipedia-page-strangely-love-child+free</ref><ref>http://conservativepulse.com/home/2008/07/edwards-sex-scandal-still-hasnt-surfaced-in-the-mainstream-press/</ref> And of course, wikipedia ''does'' mention the liberal New York Times’ poorly-researched allegations that John McCain had an affair <ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCain_presidential_campaign%2C_2008#Alleged_inappropriate_involvement_with_lobbyists</ref> in spite of the fact that the NYT’s own ombudsman said there was “no proof” the story was true. <ref>http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hiZBfIDZs3P-I5ERtItxUcQ8JwGw</ref>

# Wikipedia's article on [[Cold fusion]]<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Fusion</ref> presents it as a "continuing controversy." [[Liberals]] hope that Cold Fusion will rescue us from our oil dependency without the need to drill for oil off our coasts. Cold Fusion experiments are actually widely discredited.

# Wikipedia's article on [[Cold fusion]]<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_Fusion</ref> presents it as a "continuing controversy." [[Liberals]] hope that Cold Fusion will rescue us from our oil dependency without the need to drill for oil off our coasts. Cold Fusion experiments are actually widely discredited.

# [[Liberals]] loathe self-defense, and [[Wikipedia]]'s entry on the national self-defense system of the [[Strategic Defense Initiative]] is seething with bias and outright falsehoods.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative</ref>  Long passages are devoted to irrational criticisms of the programs, with inexplicable prominence given to criticisms by Hans Bethe, a European-raised scientist who later endorsed [[John Kerry]] for president.  The entry even claims that SDI brought "the nuclear standoff with the Soviet Union to its most critical point!"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative</ref>

# [[Liberals]] loathe self-defense, and [[Wikipedia]]'s entry on the national self-defense system of the [[Strategic Defense Initiative]] is seething with bias and outright falsehoods.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative</ref>  Long passages are devoted to irrational criticisms of the programs, with inexplicable prominence given to criticisms by Hans Bethe, a European-raised scientist who later endorsed [[John Kerry]] for president.  The entry even claims that SDI brought "the nuclear standoff with the Soviet Union to its most critical point!"<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_Defense_Initiative</ref>