Difference between revisions of "Talk:Placement bias"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(New page: Hmm... I noticed there was something like that going on at Wikipedia. I always gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I didn't realize this happened so often... Anyway, I'm going to add s...)
 
(Bias)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Hmm... I noticed there was something like that going on at Wikipedia. I always gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I didn't realize this happened so often... Anyway, I'm going to add some further examples of placement bias from the "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia" page, ok? [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 21:27, 6 October 2007 (EDT)
 
Hmm... I noticed there was something like that going on at Wikipedia. I always gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I didn't realize this happened so often... Anyway, I'm going to add some further examples of placement bias from the "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia" page, ok? [[User:Feebasfactor|Feebasfactor]] 21:27, 6 October 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
== Bias ==
 +
 +
FTA: "Wikpedia's entry on former liberal Vice President Al Gore contains no mention of the drug charges against his son. But Wikipedia's entry on conservative Vice President Dick Cheney prominently mentions his adult daughter's sexuality."
 +
:Al Gore is part of a pro-drug movement and his son uses drugs. Dick Cheney is part of an anti-homosexual movement and his daughter is homosexual. They're not really equal. (Okay, the Democratic party isn't exactly ''pro-drug'' but it's definitely ''much less anti-drug'', if you see what I mean.) Imagine if the Pope had an illegitimate child and so did Mick Jagger; the Pope's child would get a lot more coverage in a 100% neutral encyclopedia, because it's more relevant to his life and position. Am I making any sense? [[User:MrGrieves|MrGrieves]] 05:44, 11 May 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 04:44, 11 May 2008

Hmm... I noticed there was something like that going on at Wikipedia. I always gave them the benefit of the doubt, but I didn't realize this happened so often... Anyway, I'm going to add some further examples of placement bias from the "Examples of Bias in Wikipedia" page, ok? Feebasfactor 21:27, 6 October 2007 (EDT)

Bias

FTA: "Wikpedia's entry on former liberal Vice President Al Gore contains no mention of the drug charges against his son. But Wikipedia's entry on conservative Vice President Dick Cheney prominently mentions his adult daughter's sexuality."

Al Gore is part of a pro-drug movement and his son uses drugs. Dick Cheney is part of an anti-homosexual movement and his daughter is homosexual. They're not really equal. (Okay, the Democratic party isn't exactly pro-drug but it's definitely much less anti-drug, if you see what I mean.) Imagine if the Pope had an illegitimate child and so did Mick Jagger; the Pope's child would get a lot more coverage in a 100% neutral encyclopedia, because it's more relevant to his life and position. Am I making any sense? MrGrieves 05:44, 11 May 2008 (EDT)