50
edits
Conservapedia: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Jazzman831 (talk | contribs) (→Criticism: add citation as requested -- I don't think this should be in the actual article, but <ref> tags don't seem to work...) |
Eros of Fire (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| wiki_maintopic = Encyclopedia | | wiki_maintopic = Encyclopedia | ||
}} | }} | ||
'''Conservapedia''' is an encyclopedia written with a conservative viewpoint; specifically, Conservapedia's articles are | '''Conservapedia''' is an encyclopedia written with a conservative viewpoint; specifically, Conservapedia's articles are christian conservative and USA-centric. Conservapedia is in general hostile to what they perceive as social-liberal, homosexual, and evolutionist agendas. | ||
The site was started in November 2006 by Andrew Schlafly and a group of homeschooled people to provide an alternative to the perceived anti-Christian, pro-Evolution, anti-American and anti-conservative bias of Wikipedia. The stated purpose of the site is to provide a family-friendly resource for homeschooled children from fundamentalist Christian homes. However, some more adult topics such as [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality homosexuality] are also treated in depth. | The site was started in November 2006 by Andrew Schlafly and a group of homeschooled people to provide an alternative to the perceived anti-Christian, pro-Evolution, anti-American and anti-conservative bias of Wikipedia. The stated purpose of the site is to provide a family-friendly resource for homeschooled children from fundamentalist Christian homes. However, some more adult topics such as [http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexuality homosexuality] are also treated in depth. | ||
Conservapedia cannot be edited during the American night except by "trusted users", this is to prevent vandals to strike when all or most of the administrators are asleep. | Conservapedia cannot be edited during the American night except by "trusted users", this is to prevent vandals to strike when all or most of the administrators are asleep. | ||
==Criticism== | ==Criticism== | ||
Note: the following section could not be neutral, due to the fact this section was created by [[Rationalwiki]] staff. (See the [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Conservapedia&action=history history] of this article. [[User:Icewedge|Icewedge]], [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]], [[User:Elassint|Elassint]], [[User:Gulik|Gulik]] and [[User:Barbara Shack|Barbara Shack]] are all current or former RationalWiki users.) Note that no other wikiindex article has a criticism section. | '''Note: the following section could not be neutral, due to the fact this section was created by [[Rationalwiki]] staff. (See the [http://www.wikiindex.org/index.php?title=Conservapedia&action=history history] of this article. [[User:Icewedge|Icewedge]], [[User:Proxima Centauri|Proxima Centauri]], [[User:Elassint|Elassint]], [[User:Gulik|Gulik]] and [[User:Barbara Shack|Barbara Shack]] are all current or former RationalWiki users.) Note that no other wikiindex article has a criticism section.''' | ||
The website has been the subject of strong criticism by liberals and moderates for its extreme viewpoints and attacks on president-elect [http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama Barack Obama], including the widely-debunked rumor that Obama is a secret Muslim. Many users who tried to edit the site are blocked because of their opposing political views. | |||
Conservapedia is widely criticized. Liberals dislike intensely the blatant Conservative bias and outright slander against all Liberals and Moderate Conservatives in Conservapedia. Other Conservatives fear that Conservapedia is giving their cause a bad name. Both feel driven insane since they can't FIX any it, due to Conservapedia's utterly dysfunctional management. | Conservapedia is widely criticized. Liberals dislike intensely the blatant Conservative bias and outright slander against all Liberals and Moderate Conservatives in Conservapedia. Other Conservatives fear that Conservapedia is giving their cause a bad name. Both feel driven insane since they can't FIX any it, due to Conservapedia's utterly dysfunctional management. | ||