Difference between revisions of "Talk:Debate:Bias in conservapedia"
From Conservapedia
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
(EDIT: I wish there was some way there could be a level between admin and random person who just created an account. We could get the best of both worlds) | (EDIT: I wish there was some way there could be a level between admin and random person who just created an account. We could get the best of both worlds) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Why was my writing removed? There was no profanity, no opinions, no nothing. It was simply a list of the Biases in Conservapedia. If there is one for Wikipedia, there should be one for Conservapedia, or you are just proving my points and using censorship. --[[User:ALFa|ALFa]] 16:55, 15 March 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Read it again here, and tell me how it is wrong (without your opinion, with fact): http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Geo.plrd#Examples_of_Bias_in_Conservapedia | ||
Revision as of 20:55, March 15, 2007
Agreed. Debate is good.--Splark 16:51, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
(EDIT: I wish there was some way there could be a level between admin and random person who just created an account. We could get the best of both worlds)
Why was my writing removed? There was no profanity, no opinions, no nothing. It was simply a list of the Biases in Conservapedia. If there is one for Wikipedia, there should be one for Conservapedia, or you are just proving my points and using censorship. --ALFa 16:55, 15 March 2007 (EDT)
Read it again here, and tell me how it is wrong (without your opinion, with fact): http://www.conservapedia.com/User_talk:Geo.plrd#Examples_of_Bias_in_Conservapedia
