Conservapedia

Jealous, religious, over-enthusiastic fucks if you ask me. If it's biased then it is - it's people who choose which encyclopedia they're going to trust and if they see wikipedia worthy to them then that indeed is its value. From people to people without a flower-hat lady censoring and editing everything to the form "good old times" expect.
 
8. 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." 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.[8] 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.
That made me smile.
 
#2 is way off.

The renaissance wasn't inspired by Christianity, it was inspired by the study of the individual in the world rather than something greater. It just so happens that a lot of artists of the time dished out god stuff :o


Edit: Oh..and ANYONE can edit the pages. They keep saying Wikipedia but it isn't wikipedia without the people to add and change things.
 
Edit: Oh..and ANYONE can edit the pages. They keep saying Wikipedia but it isn't wikipedia without the people to add and change things.

but it is regulated and there was a comparison with A REAL new encylopedia and there was a 1.2 or 1.5% of difference ONLY... just wanted to say its still a kinda reliable source... but wtv with the bias
 
Back