Changes

Wackypedia (Wikipedia) prefers 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 and try to censor anything Christian?  Conservapedia is Christian-friendly.  

Wackypedia (Wikipedia) prefers 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 and try to censor anything Christian?  Conservapedia is Christian-friendly.  

The entry for the Renaissance in Wikipedia refuses to give any credit to Christianity.

The entry for the Renaissance in Wikipedia refuses to give any credit to Christianity.

How many other conservative entries have been censored by Wikipedia editors?

How many other conservative entries have been censored by Wikipedia editors?

Unlike most encyclopedias and news outlets, Wikipedia does not take steps to reduce bias or provide balance.  For example, CNN would ensure that Crossfire had a representative of the political right and one from the political left.  In contrast, Wikipedia policy allows bias to exist and worsen.  For example, even though most Americans (and probably most of the world) reject the theory of evolution,<ref>http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm</ref> Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evolution</ref>  Self-selection has a tendency to exacerbate bias in the absence of affirmative steps to limit it.  [[Gresham's Law]] reflects the problem in economics of bad money driving out good in the absence of corrective action.  As a result, Wikipedia is arguably more biased than CNN and other information sources.

Unlike most encyclopedias and news outlets, Wikipedia does not take steps to reduce bias or provide balance.  For example, CNN would ensure that Crossfire had a representative of the political right and one from the political left.  In contrast, Wikipedia policy allows bias to exist and worsen.  For example, even though most Americans (and probably most of the world) reject the theory of [[evolution]],<ref>http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm</ref> Wikipedia editors commenting on the topic are nearly 100% pro-evolution.<ref>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Evolution</ref>  Self-selection has a tendency to exacerbate bias in the absence of affirmative steps to limit it.  [[Gresham's Law]] reflects the problem in economics of bad [[money]] driving out good in the absence of corrective action.  As a result, Wikipedia is arguably more biased than CNN and other information sources.