Search Wikipedia from this site (1 Viewer)

[Schweddy]

Click on the Encyclopedia link from the navbar.

Happy fact finding.

 

[Conflict]

Click on the Encyclopedia link from the navbar.

Happy fact finding.

A good feature. Wiki-pedia is a valuable source in maintaining an objectionable frame of mind. It offers no bias.. it is a source of media that is quite refreshing and impartial.

 

[Diogenes]

A good feature. Wiki-pedia is a valuable source in maintaining an objectionable frame of mind. It offers no bias.. it is a source of media that is quite refreshing and impartial.

It is also now thoroughly discredited as a factual source.

 

[Arch Enemy]

I like facts.

 

[Conflict]

It is also now thoroughly discredited as a factual source.

It has hardly been discredited as it received no official accreditation from any educational source nor should any media. Journalism is supposed to evolve around fact and source. Wikipedia exists within itself to offer a diverse variety of opinion but to most importantly report fact and source. THe mainstream media has proven incapable of reporting facts alone by virtue of industry and propaganda.

The issue in which you claim WIKI was discredited was a premeditated action by a person playing a prank on someone they knew. It's quite similar to Bush planting false media in Iraq. In the long run that dog won't eat.. nor did the attempt of the infiltration of WIKIpedia. It may of had a snack but it didn't really eat. It was discovered as it should have been. As a prank by someone whose intent was to exploit the vulnerability of WIKIpedia.

If you would like... and if you can.... find something that you can dispute within en.wikipedia.org that was not posted by some radical prankster in attempt to expose the so called "lack of administrative endorsement" that you speak of.

Freedom of press.

 

[Conflict]

I like facts.

Really? Me too

Where exactly should one go to find strictly facts?

I would really like to hear the answer to this one.

I don't know if there exists any such virtue of dissemination.

Oh.. CJB.net eh?? You must be 3L33T. I'm sure in your own mind you have all the answers to everything. Take all zig.

 

[cnredd]

Really? Me too

Where exactly should one go to find strictly facts?

I would really like to hear the answer to this one.

I don't know if there exists any such virtue of dissemination.

Oh.. CJB.net eh?? You must be 3L33T. I'm sure in your own mind you have all the answers to everything. Take all zig.

For surveys, you can't beat Pew Research...Although I do tend to stay away from all political surveys...

For political facts, I tend to go with Factcheck.org...

Debunking myths goes to snopes.com...

Other than that, there is likely to be SOME bias, but I've mentioned this a couple of days ago on another thread...

"bias" and "legitimate" are two very different things...You can have both...

It's when the facts are scewed to fit the agenda where the issue lies...

If the square peg doesn't fit into the round hole...admit it...

Don't break out the hammer, a la Michael Moore...

 

[Schweddy]

LOL, it is a feature we bring to the table.

You are allowed to discount its validity for facts; same with FoxNews, CNN or any other site that has humans writing the prose.

However, it is pretty neat in a jam to look things up while still on the same site.

 

[cnredd]

LOL, it is a feature we bring to the table.

You are allowed to discount its validity for facts; same with FoxNews, CNN or any other site that has humans writing the prose.

However, it is pretty neat in a jam to look things up while still on the same site.

Humans write for CNN??...:doh

 

[Schweddy]

Humans write for CNN??...:doh

lol, I sooo should have seen that comin'.

 

[Conflict]

Don't break out the hammer, a la Michael Moore...

¿¿¿¿¿¿¿​

Did Michael Moore write something on Wikipedia? Whatever do you mean?
Who offers Michael Moore A La Carte?
If I were going to break out a hammer... i'd break out the sickle too!

 

[Conflict]

Other than that, there is likely to be SOME bias, but I've mentioned this a couple of days ago on another thread...

"bias" and "legitimate" are two very different things...You can have both...

It's when the facts are scewed to fit the agenda where the issue lies...

If the square peg doesn't fit into the round hole...admit it...

Don't break out the hammer, a la Michael Moore...

SOME bias? I thought I had previously insinuated that you hold SOME bias... but if I recall correctly you denied it. I am actually agreeing with you here. THere is always likely to be SOME Bias.

Now, insinuating that I am a devout fan of Michael Moore is a "navy pride" tactic. Implicating that I deny fact to fit my agenda is even more absurd.

If you wish to directly dispell anything that I had previously stated that led you to believe I hold an underlying agenda or motive then you are more than welcome to...

If you wish to directly dispute anything that I had previously stated in regard to the facts... you are more than welcome to.

Happy Jesus Day!

 

[cnredd]

SOME bias? I thought I had previously insinuated that you hold SOME bias... but if I recall correctly you denied it. I am actually agreeing with you here. THere is always likely to be SOME Bias.

Now, insinuating that I am a devout fan of Michael Moore is a "navy pride" tactic. Implicating that I deny fact to fit my agenda is even more absurd.

If you wish to directly dispell anything that I had previously stated that led you to believe I hold an underlying agenda or motive then you are more than welcome to...

If you wish to directly dispute anything that I had previously stated in regard to the facts... you are more than welcome to.

Happy Jesus Day!

I think you're misreading...

I was just answering your question...

Where exactly should one go to find strictly facts?

The Michael Moore comments was something that shouldn't be done by anyone...I wasn't implicating anyone here(and you specifically)...It wasn't to be taken as an accusation...

Just like if I said "You shouldn't mix and heroin"...That doesn't mean YOU directly...It's just a general statement...

Unless, of course, I had prior knowledge that you HAVE mixed them...:2wave:

 

[Conflict]

I think you're misreading...

I was just answering your question...

Where exactly should one go to find strictly facts?

The Michael Moore comments was something that shouldn't be done by anyone...I wasn't implicating anyone here(and you specifically)...It wasn't to be taken as an accusation...

Just like if I said "You shouldn't mix and heroin"...That doesn't mean YOU directly...It's just a general statement...

Unless, of course, I had prior knowledge that you HAVE mixed them...:2wave:

Fair enough. I'll take that as a concession and no brownie points earned. :yt