Difference between revisions of "User:LanthanumK/Wikipedia contrast"
From Conservapedia
LanthanumK (Talk | contribs) (start page) |
LanthanumK (Talk | contribs) (some stuff) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | This is a page of comparisons and contrasts between Wikipedia and Conservapedia. As I am a user on both sites, I can see the issues with both. | + | This is a page of comparisons and contrasts between ''English'' Wikipedia and Conservapedia. As I am a user on both sites, I can see the issues with both. This does not include Simple English Wikipedia. |
− | + | ==Benefits of Wikipedia== | |
+ | *It is easier to edit articles as a new user. | ||
+ | *It is not so politically-oriented. It has a slight liberal bias while this site has a strongly conservative bias. | ||
+ | *It is more complete. | ||
+ | *It is easier to upload photos. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Disadvantages of Wikipedia== | ||
+ | *It is not censored, showing bad pictures and bad language. One of the biggest users of profanity is a self-professed "devout Christians". | ||
+ | *There is much more vandalism than at Conservapedia. Hoaxes are relatively abundant, although there are not many less hoaxes over here. | ||
+ | *Neutral Point of View is used to push consensus by a few politically-oriented editors. | ||
+ | *Assume Good Faith is used as a hammer to beat people over the head in debates. | ||
+ | *Arguments in many places can be very petty. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Benefits of Conservapedia== | ||
+ | *There is much less vandalism here. | ||
+ | *It has more family-friendly content. | ||
+ | *It has both conservative and liberal viewpoints which is more NPOV than Wikipedia. | ||
+ | *Petty debates over Manual of Style changes or what constitutes medical advice or whether people should notify others of grammatical errors in posts are nonexistent. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Disadvantages of Conservapedia== | ||
+ | *Editing for new users and IP's is restricted. | ||
+ | *A few hoaxes exist, although Wikipedia has hoaxes too. | ||
+ | *It is less complete. | ||
+ | *It mixes up morals (principles of right and wrong) with opinions (conservative v. liberal). | ||
+ | *It is more difficult to upload photos for legitimate users. |
Revision as of 21:20, November 17, 2010
This is a page of comparisons and contrasts between English Wikipedia and Conservapedia. As I am a user on both sites, I can see the issues with both. This does not include Simple English Wikipedia.
Contents
Benefits of Wikipedia
- It is easier to edit articles as a new user.
- It is not so politically-oriented. It has a slight liberal bias while this site has a strongly conservative bias.
- It is more complete.
- It is easier to upload photos.
Disadvantages of Wikipedia
- It is not censored, showing bad pictures and bad language. One of the biggest users of profanity is a self-professed "devout Christians".
- There is much more vandalism than at Conservapedia. Hoaxes are relatively abundant, although there are not many less hoaxes over here.
- Neutral Point of View is used to push consensus by a few politically-oriented editors.
- Assume Good Faith is used as a hammer to beat people over the head in debates.
- Arguments in many places can be very petty.
Benefits of Conservapedia
- There is much less vandalism here.
- It has more family-friendly content.
- It has both conservative and liberal viewpoints which is more NPOV than Wikipedia.
- Petty debates over Manual of Style changes or what constitutes medical advice or whether people should notify others of grammatical errors in posts are nonexistent.
Disadvantages of Conservapedia
- Editing for new users and IP's is restricted.
- A few hoaxes exist, although Wikipedia has hoaxes too.
- It is less complete.
- It mixes up morals (principles of right and wrong) with opinions (conservative v. liberal).
- It is more difficult to upload photos for legitimate users.