2,002
edits
Changes
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 00:09, March 30, 2007
, 00:09, March 30, 2007→Ratio (again)
:::: I don't know why liberals won't admit they are liberals. Conservatives don't try to conceal their views. Why do liberals? No one, not even Jimmy Wales, credibly disputes that Wikipedia editors are more liberal than the American public. Defining a liberal quotient in the most reasonably manner - the ratio of liberals to conservatives in a population - results in the conclusion that the American public has a liberal quotient of 0.5 and Wikipedia has a liberal quotient six times greater, or 3.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 06:12, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
:::: I don't know why liberals won't admit they are liberals. Conservatives don't try to conceal their views. Why do liberals? No one, not even Jimmy Wales, credibly disputes that Wikipedia editors are more liberal than the American public. Defining a liberal quotient in the most reasonably manner - the ratio of liberals to conservatives in a population - results in the conclusion that the American public has a liberal quotient of 0.5 and Wikipedia has a liberal quotient six times greater, or 3.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 06:12, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
:::::I don't why you can't admit that you did poor statistics. There is nothing conservative about fudging numbers. The theorem that you want to prove is true. Wikipedia is more liberal. The proof that you give is wrong. There is nothing liberal about the criticism on your proof. Everybody can make a math mistake, but it apparently it costs you to much courage to admit it. [[User:Order]] 30 March 10:10 AEST.
== Re: #6 (Great Flood) ==
== Re: #6 (Great Flood) ==