Changes

Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)

Revision as of 10:03, March 20, 2007

1,435 bytes added , 10:03, March 20, 2007

Line 291: Line 291:

::::*"Wikipedia is the Encyclopedia project, that initiated the development of the MediaWikiSoftware."[http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Introduction]

::::So please tell me how this is not very persuasive. --[[User:Sid 3050|Sid 3050]] 19:20, 19 March 2007 (EDT)

+

:::::Please, let's distinguish between the content (the text of the articles, etc.), the medium (the Wiki software), and the "skin" (the visual look and design which is a part of the Wiki software, implemented as a CSS "style sheet," but easily changed.

+

:::::MediaWIki is open source '''software,''' licensed under a free license. Anyone can use it, including Conservapedia. Using it the way Conservapedia does is perfectly OK, the WikiMedia foundation ''encourages'' it, it's a big win-win.

+

:::::The MediaWIki development project is so very very closely associated with Wikipedia that it's extremely close to untrue to say "Wikipedia didn't come up with it." MediaWiki is more closely associated with Wikipedia than Jimbo Wales is.

+

:::::The "look" of Wikipedia, the skin as it's called, is very definitely a part of MediaWiki. It is called the "monobook" skin. Wikipedia used to have a very plain "1995-ish" look, and developing the new look was a big part of the revisions that went into MediaWiki 3.0.

+

:::::While it is correct to say that Conservapedia doesn't use '''content''' from Wikipedia (by the way:

+

::::::*it is absolutely '''churlish''' not to acknowledge that "Wikipedia" or more strictly the Wikimedia Foundation has not made Conservapedia (and most other WIki-based sites) a great and generous '''gift''' in the form of the Mediawiki software.

+

:::::Fair is fair. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 06:03, 20 March 2007 (EDT)

==CE is not an example of bias==

Dpbsmith

4,994

edits