This Conservapedia seems bizarre.

I saw a bit in the paper about it, and it sounds weird.

Wikipedia is too liberal, too anti-American, and way too anti-Christian for the founder of Conservapedia, Phyllis Schlafly's son - a teacher!

On the about page, it says "Tired of the LIBERAL BIAS every time you search on Google and a Wikipedia page appears?"

What? Okay, then.

Some people see bias everywhere.

I only use Wikipedia for entertainment information - who wrote this, how many books did so-and-so write, what episode of what TV show, etc. I'd never use it for real work. There are free online encyclopedias that also appear in book form.

And I'm not using Conservapedia, even though it loves the facts, after adhering to certain rules.

Here are some of the weirdest examples of 'bias' in Wikipedia.

• Wikipedia says some scholars and authors question whether Jesus was a real person or not.
• It "often uses foreign spelling of words, even though most English-speaking users are American. ... Conservapedia favors American spellings of words."
• It uses BCE and CE instead of BC and AD. According to Conservapedia, since they're based on the Christian ones, why use them at all? I don't know, maybe because Wikipedia talks about other religions, and in many books and research articles, you see BCE and CE. I checked out a big, illustrated guide to world religions that seemed to be at a child's level, and it used BCE and CE - even when talking about Christianity.
• Its "entry for Johnny Appleseed, a Christian folk hero, omits a discussion of his strong faith and instead features baseless speculation about his health, a year of death different from that of his obituary, and a silly story designed to make a Christian preacher look foolish."

The entries are also too long and gossipy.

And there are too many on pop culture.

And too many on other countries and other religions, no doubt.



Conservapedia is, rather than the evil liberal Wikipedia, designed for education. (Private, no doubt.) No teacher wanted a source that said "Wikipedia", because it's user-edited, and could be wrong.

Since it's wrong from time to time, it shows bias.

What?

Anyways, it's so damn weird.

Whatever. I only use Wiki to find the name of episodes of Sabrina the Teenage Witch, really. At least lately. I also used it to look up satirical and parody-of-another books.

I wouldn't trust either, for anything serious.