Changes

the math doesn't work out.
Line 3: Line 3:  
# Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D.  The dates are based on the birth of [[Jesus]], so why pretend otherwise?  Conservapedia is Christian-friendly and exposes the [[CE]] deception.
 
# Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D.  The dates are based on the birth of [[Jesus]], so why pretend otherwise?  Conservapedia is Christian-friendly and exposes the [[CE]] deception.
 
# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.
 
# Wikipedia's entry for the Renaissance denies any credit to Christianity, its primary inspiration.
−
# Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades.<ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=444</ref>  But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative".<ref>Compare [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians Liberal Wikipedians] with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Conservative_Wikipedians Conservative Wikipedians]</ref>  That suggests Wikipedia is six times more liberal than the American public.
+
# Polls show that about twice as many Americans identify themselves as "conservative" compared with "liberal", and that ratio has been increasing for two decades.<ref>http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=444</ref>  But on Wikipedia, about three times as many editors identify themselves as "liberal" compared with "conservative".<ref>Compare [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians Liberal Wikipedians] with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Conservative_Wikipedians Conservative Wikipedians]</ref>  That suggests Wikipedia is much more liberal than the American public.
 
# Wikipedia's entry on [[abortion]] reads like a brochure for the abortion industry.  Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/malec.pdf</ref>  Wikipedia's entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf</ref>.
 
# Wikipedia's entry on [[abortion]] reads like a brochure for the abortion industry.  Wikipedia denies and omits the results of 16 out of 17 statistically significant studies showing increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/malec.pdf</ref>  Wikipedia's entry also omits the evidence of abortion causing increased premature birth of subsequent children.<ref>http://www.jpands.org/vol8no2/rooney.pdf</ref>.
 
# Initially a Wikipedia admin deleted an entry about Conservapedia because it did not meet Wikipedia's notability standards.  Now that Conservapedia does meet the Notability standards, Wikipedia has a new entry about Conservapedia.  Its new entry is filled with obvious bias, numerous errors, out-of-date citations, and self-serving false statements.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia</ref>. Such biased errors are pervasive on Wikipedia.
 
# Initially a Wikipedia admin deleted an entry about Conservapedia because it did not meet Wikipedia's notability standards.  Now that Conservapedia does meet the Notability standards, Wikipedia has a new entry about Conservapedia.  Its new entry is filled with obvious bias, numerous errors, out-of-date citations, and self-serving false statements.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia</ref>. Such biased errors are pervasive on Wikipedia.
1,263

edits