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

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Disadvantages of Wikipedia)
(Disadvantages of Wikipedia)
Line 10: Line 10:
 
*It is not censored, showing bad pictures and bad language. One of the biggest users of profanity is a self-professed "devout Christian".
 
*It is not censored, showing bad pictures and bad language. One of the biggest users of profanity is a self-professed "devout Christian".
 
*There is much more vandalism than at Conservapedia. Hoaxes are relatively abundant, although there are not many less hoaxes over here.
 
*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.
+
*Neutral Point of View is arbitrary and a few editors make what they believe "neutral".
 
*Assume Good Faith is used as a hammer to beat people over the head in debates.
 
*Assume Good Faith is used as a hammer to beat people over the head in debates.
 
*Arguments in many places can be very petty.
 
*Arguments in many places can be very petty.

Revision as of 15:14, 18 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 Christian".
  • 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 arbitrary and a few editors make what they believe "neutral".
  • Assume Good Faith is used as a hammer to beat people over the head in debates.
  • Arguments in many places can be very petty.

Hoax

Potassium permanganate is a strong oxidizing agent and cannot reduce nitrate to ammonia. Sodium bicarbonate (baking soda) does not contain any nitrate or lithium. Lithium nitrate, an oxidizing agent, cannot reduce water to hydrogen.

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.

Hoax

Transition metals are not strong oxidizing agents; some are moderately strong reducing agents while others are weak reducing agents.