Forum:Biased Opinions and Thoughts in Articles
I was researching conspiracy theories behind the JFK Assassination when I stumbled across this website. I read the basic mission outline of the site and I was liked the general idea of it. While clicking on links within the JFK Conspiracy Article however, I noticed that there were articles where the author's personal opinions and biases were blatant, e.g. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy ~ Second line; "...besting the arguablely more qualified (although insane), but far less attractive Richard Nixon."
My issue in that particular example is the "...(although insane), but far less attractive..." portion. The "...but far less attractive..." I can understand meaning that in the general consensus of the election, he lost. Therefore he was a "far less attractive" candidate to the American people. The "...(although insane)..." portion is blatantly biased. I only bring this up because there is no place for bias or intolerance in a rational or scientific community, which creating a rational, scientific community seemed to be the objective of the website. Food for thought.
By creating this thread, I wanted to draw attention to the personal biases and create a place where users could submit articles they thought to contain bias opinions to be reviewed and discussed for revision, in order to better this website, because the general idea behind this site is promising.
- This is part of an ongoing slow-boil discussion on RW. There's an Edit button at the top of every page. If you see things you think reflect unsupportable bias, and I agree that some of what you're pointing out is at least pointless, fix it. If you find yourself being reverted on sight, have a discussion before you give up. It's worth it.
15:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)