Difference between revisions of "789 - 11. Statement"

From FreeWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
[checked revision][checked revision]
(Created page with "'''back to Index''' 11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
'''[[789-Bold_Statements|back to Index]]'''
+
=11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY =
  
  
11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY
 
  
Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust.(1) Their article on homeopathy is pure
+
Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust. Their article on homeopathy is pure propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science. They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of equanimity and fair reporting. They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective. Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity? Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences. Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased.  
propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science.
+
For critical information on Wikipedia see:
They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of
 
equanimity and fair reporting.
 
They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased
 
detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and
 
there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective.
 
Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity?
 
Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences.
 
Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased.
 
  
(1. article exposing corruption at Wikipedia)
+
[http://www.truthwiki.org/wikipedia Truthwiki]
 +
 
 +
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dysfunction-at-wikipedia_b_5924226
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
On the Philipp Cross story:
 +
https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/15/wikipedia-takes-down-article-on-philip-cross-life-bans-author/
 +
 
 +
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/
 +
 
 +
https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/23/more-about-wikipedia-corruption.html
 +
 
 +
 
 +
This is an empty page to create content. Please write your article here.
 +
 
 +
For advice how to edit, please use the Help in the menu or see here: [http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids]

Revision as of 23:06, 10 November 2018

11. WIKIPEDIA IS BIASED AND IGNORES THE FACTS ABOUT HOMEOPATHY

Sadly Wikipedia is no longer the unbiased internet site that you can trust. Their article on homeopathy is pure propaganda and an attack on the integrity of real science. They have refused to allow to be included on their site. This is in direct violation of their stated principles of equanimity and fair reporting. They refuse to allow experts in the field to describe and define their own profession – they only allow biased detractors to write the definition. While it may be a controversial field, there are other controversial fields as well and there are ways to note the controversy and remain objective. Can you imagine if they allowed Atheists to write the definition of Christianity? Good addtions, but please edit this down to 3 or four sentences. Click here to read the whole story about Wikipedia and how it has become corrupted and biased. For critical information on Wikipedia see:

Truthwiki

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dysfunction-at-wikipedia_b_5924226

 

On the Philipp Cross story: https://off-guardian.org/2018/05/15/wikipedia-takes-down-article-on-philip-cross-life-bans-author/

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2018/05/the-philip-cross-affair/

https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2018/05/23/more-about-wikipedia-corruption.html


This is an empty page to create content. Please write your article here.

For advice how to edit, please use the Help in the menu or see here: http://www.freewiki.eu/en/index.php?title=Processing_aids