Difference between revisions of "User:LanthanumK/Wikipedia contrast"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(start page)
 
(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.
  
This page will be created a little later.
+
==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, 17 November 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.

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.