To combat the rampant bias of Wikipedia, some genius has come up with Conservapedia, which, presumably, has no bias:
"Wikipedia allows the use of B.C.E. instead of B.C. and C.E. instead of A.D. The dates are based on the birth of Jesus, so why pretend otherwise? Conservapedia is Christian-friendly and exposes the CE deception."
Oh, and let's not forget the most compelling of cases:
"Wikipedia often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English speaking users are American. Look up "Most Favored Nation" on Wikipedia and it automatically converts the spelling to the British spelling "Most Favoured Nation", even there there are far more American than British users. Look up "Division of labor" on Wikipedia and it automatically converts to the British spelling "Division of labour," then insists on the British spelling for "specialization" also.[3]. Enter "Hapsburg" (the European ruling family) and Wikipedia automatically changes the spelling to Habsburg, even though the American spelling has always been "Hapsburg". Within entries British spellings appear in the silliest of places, even when the topic is American. Conservapedia favors American spellings of words."
Well, thank God somebody had the nerve to stand up to no less an authority than Wikipedia, an encyclopedia written by just about anyone and everyone. And thank God and George Bush that we are now finally able to assert the supremacy of the American Way of Spelling.
Maybe I should write and submit Conservapedia article on the definition of Bias.
This is actually great. As you said Wizard, anybody and everybody can contribute to Wikipedia. It is, by definition, almost perfectly democratic. Therefore, the Conservapedia backlash is, by definition, a revolt against democracy and the majority.
ReplyDeleteAnother explanation could be that christo-fascist fundamentalists don't generally read or consult reference materials, thus the lack of their input into the content of Wikipedia.
Hilarious, really, that they would find bias in democracy.
ReplyDeleteWhat a bunch of pussies.
Jaaaaahysus-Merry-N-Jooosuf. This old saw again? Such idiocy just compelled me to move my bookmarked Wikipedia entry higher on the references list.
ReplyDeleteI say old saw because the emergence of this "Conservapedia" reminds me of Carlyle's distrust of democratic reforms because--oh my fucking god--any human being could vote...including the uneducated (read: Arnold's later Philistines)!
And the British spelling and usage justification is such a red herring, especially since the bloody BRITS are the ones who conceived of Wikipedia, despite there being ostensibly more American users. Gee...could there be more American Wiki surfers because, well, there are just more 'Mericans than Brits? No, that logic is rubbish.
Oh, and drpuma's got something there regarding conservatives' general tendency to be TOLD what to believe (think of your average Catholic's lack of Biblical exegesis)--thus, they don't necessarily need to go look up something. You know, the anti-version of my favorite bumper sticker: Never Question Authority.
Roaring still...