a conservative wiki with articles (95+%?) that always somehow end up either blaming Liberals and non-Christians for some reason or another. It also seems to strongly imply one's religious beliefs has a connection to ones capability of doing certain things (e.g. violence).
due to the fact that it's a wiki some these examples might not be accurate anymore.
some examples of bias/lies/inaccuracies on conservapedia :
#1 socialism - we see a picture of Hitler on the top of the page
Nazism is more of an ideology of its own than anything else, it would be more accurate to place it in its own article than be under socialism. Also it also puts communism under this too, rather inaccurate.
#2 Fredrich Nietzsche - the first section is calling him crazy
WTF?! they didn't even explain what his philosophical views are and he's declared crazy right at the beginning?!
#3 Islam - "the most violent religion"
I don't care if this is true or not but this is this is bad etiquette calling it right off the bat, not to mention it also implies there's something questionable about it
#4 Bill Clinton - all the credits of economic success should belong to Republicans (implied)
really? please explain why public opinion favored him during the government shutdown and impeachment
#5 Grand Theft Auto
I don't even know where to begin on this...
due to the fact that it's a wiki some these examples might not be accurate anymore.
some examples of bias/lies/inaccuracies on conservapedia :
#1 socialism - we see a picture of Hitler on the top of the page
Nazism is more of an ideology of its own than anything else, it would be more accurate to place it in its own article than be under socialism. Also it also puts communism under this too, rather inaccurate.
#2 Fredrich Nietzsche - the first section is calling him crazy
WTF?! they didn't even explain what his philosophical views are and he's declared crazy right at the beginning?!
#3 Islam - "the most violent religion"
I don't care if this is true or not but this is this is bad etiquette calling it right off the bat, not to mention it also implies there's something questionable about it
#4 Bill Clinton - all the credits of economic success should belong to Republicans (implied)
really? please explain why public opinion favored him during the government shutdown and impeachment
#5 Grand Theft Auto
I don't even know where to begin on this...
some more examples of bias/lies/inaccuracies/stupidity on Conservapedia
#1 you can't edit anonymously
is this really free or is this a (right wing) dictatorship?
#2 George W. Bush
mentions nothing about him being attacked by a shoe thrower at Iraq
so much for being fair and balanced...
#1 you can't edit anonymously
is this really free or is this a (right wing) dictatorship?
#2 George W. Bush
mentions nothing about him being attacked by a shoe thrower at Iraq
so much for being fair and balanced...
by extreme133 March 24, 2011
A webpage which serves a purpose of countering Wikipiedia's alleged bias towards "liberalism." The truth is, it's just an intolerant, religious persn that bashes everything that goes against his religious, political, and scientific views, that most closely resemble those of a caveman. An apparently strong believer in the Jonah in the whale fairy tale of the bible, he insists that evolutionists suffer a syndrome called "evolution syndrome" and that we just "somehow" know that we came from other species. In what his words would be, he is a false prophet.
GOP convention
John: I saw a black man today. Oh, and also one of those hippies evolutionists.
Calvin: yeah i read about them in conservapedia. Strange folk
John: I saw a black man today. Oh, and also one of those hippies evolutionists.
Calvin: yeah i read about them in conservapedia. Strange folk
by LukeSky🚶 May 1, 2014
Person #1: I went on Conservapedia today.
Person #2: You must be really smart now.
Person #1: I got an A on my test 25 minutes afterward.
Person #2: You must be really smart now.
Person #1: I got an A on my test 25 minutes afterward.
by Illinoisian November 25, 2018