Difference between revisions of "Conservapedia:Quality"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(replying to random page survey)
(correcting a math error)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
:5 good articles: 1, 2, 3. 8, 10
 
:5 good articles: 1, 2, 3. 8, 10
 
:2 stubs: 4, 7
 
:2 stubs: 4, 7
:2 useless: 5
+
:1 useless: 5
 
:2 sabotage: 6, 9
 
:2 sabotage: 6, 9
  

Revision as of 18:22, 19 April 2007

Here is a survey of ten random pages:

5 good articles: 1, 2, 3. 8, 10
2 stubs: 4, 7
1 useless: 5
2 sabotage: 6, 9
This is interesting, but leaves questions unanswered. How does this compare to Wikipedia? What type of sabotage was it? 5 good articles out of 10 is probably better than Wikipedia, in my experience.
The analysis below is like the approach taken on Wikipedia: judge an article by how long it is, with more words meaning a better article. That's not our approach here, where we value conciseness as a true encyclopedia and learning resource does.--Aschlafly 13:45, 19 April 2007 (EDT)


Biblical criticism

2000 words Looks encyclopedic

Violin

300 words Main authors: bobtexas, ebdpk, dpbsmith

James Ussher

Was it copied from Wikipedia? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher

Clothes

16 words Items worn on the body meant for the creation of warmth and comfort in various environments.

Privilege for a Private Corporation

130 words legal mumbo-jumbo

Help ma Boab

A euphemism employed by the Transhadrial to avoid blasphemy. (vandalism)

Colony

10 words A nation's settlement in a conquered or previously unsettled territory.


William Remington

440 words RobS (his spy series)

Disarmament treaties

26 words Position favored by Liberals who see it as a way to reduce the possibility of war but opposed by conservatives who feel that it weakens countries.

George Orwell

520 words (180 are quotes)