On 13/10/2010 16:02, Fred Bauder wrote: >> So we got Conservapedia and some other conservative website accusing >> Wikipedia of having a liberal bias. What else is new, or what else are >> we to expect? >> >> -MuZemike > Well, is there anything at all to it, or is it just bull? > Of course they can point out deficiencies in Wikipedia articles. Those exist. The question is whether they can prove the case for either of (a) conscious slanting or (b) systemic bias, away from neutral treatment. We should not care if anyone dislikes a WP article because it is neutral: we should care if a serious deviation from neutrality can be shown. Naturally Conservapedia is selective in its interests, and probably the list is as revealing about its selectivity as about anything else. By putting the focus on a subset of articles it might be possible to demonstrate selective bias in an area in Wikipedia: I don't suppose anyone seriously thinks we have no systemic bias of any kind. Which is why my response was in terms of sorting. It is more perhaps of looking for signal in a load of "noise". We know that criticisms of disproportion in coverage, for example, are always with us.
I didn't feel much illuminated. Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
