Changes

:::Well, I'd like to ask you this: can you find any well-known encyclopedia ''except Wikipedia'' that includes them? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Well, I'd like to ask you this: can you find any well-known encyclopedia ''except Wikipedia'' that includes them? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::::I have no idea if I can or not, but I’m going to assume I can’t and that’s why you phrased the question as you did.  But that isn’t the point—I doubt I could find an encyclopedia (other than Wikipedia) that has entries on [[Anne Coulter]] (let alone a whole entry dedicated to her book [[Godless: the Church of Liberalism]]), the [[Homosexual Agenda]], and [[Pastafarian]]s, but not on [[Liberia]], the [[UAW]], or [[Baptist]]s.  Someone thought all of the former were important articles to write, but no one has, yet, seen fit to compose articles for the latter—Conservipedia is not just like an encyclopedia, so whether an encyclopedia (with limited numbers of researchers and limited room) would include this information or not is the wrong question to ask.  The question we should ask is whether or not the information is true and whether or not the information could help a reader understand why the world is the way it is or how the world is.  Here, the eplanitory power of the information is high (people apply to colleges based on their rankings) and the information is (I assume) true, so it belongs in the article—probably not in the heading, but somewhere in the article.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::::I have no idea if I can or not, but I’m going to assume I can’t and that’s why you phrased the question as you did.  But that isn’t the point—I doubt I could find an encyclopedia (other than Wikipedia) that has entries on [[Anne Coulter]] (let alone a whole entry dedicated to her book [[Godless: The Church of Liberalism]]), the [[Homosexual agenda]], and [[Pastafarian]]s, but not on [[Liberia]], the [[UAW]], or [[Baptist]]s.  Someone thought all of the former were important articles to write, but no one has, yet, seen fit to compose articles for the latter—Conservipedia is not just like an encyclopedia, so whether an encyclopedia (with limited numbers of researchers and limited room) would include this information or not is the wrong question to ask.  The question we should ask is whether or not the information is true and whether or not the information could help a reader understand why the world is the way it is or how the world is.  Here, the explanitory power of the information is high (people apply to colleges based on their rankings) and the information is (I assume) true, so it belongs in the article—probably not in the heading, but somewhere in the article.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 15:00, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::I'm the one who put the ranking in there.  I think it's probably okay either way though agree it doesn't belong in the lead.  At the time I was quickly editing the original version which slammed Brown - the sentence initially read something like "Brown is an Ivy League school but is consistently rated as the worst of them.".  While that may be true it's horribly misleading.  [[User:Murray|Murray]] 13:46, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

::I'm the one who put the ranking in there.  I think it's probably okay either way though agree it doesn't belong in the lead.  At the time I was quickly editing the original version which slammed Brown - the sentence initially read something like "Brown is an Ivy League school but is consistently rated as the worst of them.".  While that may be true it's horribly misleading.  [[User:Murray|Murray]] 13:46, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Agree completely. (Just think, they ''could'' have said "literally nobody goes to Brown's law school.")  [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)

:::Agree completely. (Just think, they ''could'' have said "literally nobody goes to Brown's law school.")  [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 14:17, 28 March 2007 (EDT)