FREEP this: Wikipedia's Biased Description of Free Republic

Wikipedia.com | ongoing | liberals

[nerdgirl]

What a joke - the liberals that you find in places like Dmoz and other internet directories have managed to fill the Wikipedia description for Free Republic with all kinds of snipes that make FR look like a marginalized group of extremists.

But, the beauty is that anybody can change a Wikipedia entry. I worked on one of the sections (which shall go nameless!) a bit already - it's easy to spot.

Believe it or not Wikipedia entries get quite a few page views - the site is one of the top 50 sites on the web - so let's get this description to be "fair and balanced"!

Sorry but I can't post the URL to Wikipedia here, - but if you Google wikipedia, "free republic", you'll find the entry.

[SubMareener]

As little as $5.00 per month from everyone of us winners in life's lottery would do the trick!

[expat_panama]

Don't bother clicking back to the thread-- someone posted pictures of feces.

I was agreeing with you that overall the entry was good.    I was only disagreeing with the entry's suggestion that freepers were basically negative.

Maybe they were right and I was wrong after all.

[relictele]

I think it's handy but many of the articles do indeed show a tilt that makes the Matterhorn look flat.

It's catnip to those bores you encounter at the music store, the ballgame or anywhere else that somebody thinks you're entitled to their opinion.

The George W. Bush entry is sad bordering on hilarious in its poorly disguised venom.

[July 4th]

Who the heck is Jim Robertson?

[Doctor Stochastic]

They'd have been a lot more accurate to state that freepers have things they like: including a preference for: the United States, its constitution, defense, the rule of law, lower taxes, smaller government, and freedom.

There's not much call for lower taxes or smaller government here; there's some support for vigilantism (like the guy who shot the ex-cons because he didn't like pedophiles). There's often more support for Empirism than for defense. That's the nature of the Net.

[Peter Libra]

Ahem, "everyone" is a pretty broad statement. Still, I agree with you on most points here. Does everyone carefully peruse the WHOLE thing though?. One of my own prime mistakes on FR has been to cull the objectionable things and lead off too soon. Worth re-reading is in two areas. They are where Freepers are generally in agreement and where they are diverse.

I can categorically state, ahem, too pompous here,that Wikipedia has quite fairly nailed it. Oh that damned weed marijuana and the potheads on this website- shoot em'. LOL

[CalRepublican]

I like this paragraph: Alexa, a company that ranks the Internet's 100,000 most visited sites, and measures their traffic in users per million, estimates that Free Republic reaches approximately five to six hundred users per million each day, and ranks at number 1,560 of all sites. Comparitively, by Alexa Internet's estimation, Wikipedia.org reaches 11 to 12 thousand per million each day and ranks at 53, Yahoo reaches 300,000 and ranks at no. 1, and Google reaches 220,000 and ranks at no. 3. Visits at Free Republic tend to spike sharply upward during election seasons and when news breaks which captures its users' interest. Note, however, that Alexa rankings are not reliable as a means of assessing actual traffic to a site. Shouldn't we be compared to our "countersite" DU? I bet that traffic comparison would tell you a whole lot more.

[Tribune7]

Right now it actually seems kind of fair. (albeit I'm sure it will change)

[Tribune7]

Right now it actually seems kind of fair. (albeit I'm sure it will change)

[Brad’s Gramma]

Seriously, for most of us, that's a drop in the bucket, isn't it?

[nerdgirl]

You highlighted one of the paragraphs that demonstrates the bias I meant when I posted the thread. An Alexa ranking in the top 2000 sites is fantastic, and incredibly hard to achieve. After dinner I'll try to post a list of comparative rankings in the same category as FR.

[Howlin]

I "edited" this section:

* '''Freeploader''' is a pejorative term to address those who may not have donated to the site. The term is not part of the official lexicon of the site. Many posters at Free Republic who do donate do not make their donations known as they prefer to donate privately. It has become a source of irritation to some freepers that this practice has begun, as some freepers do not have the financial means to donate, or as mentioned, wish to do so anonymously.


I think that sucks and it's not true.

[Brad’s Gramma]

Many posters at Free Republic who do donate do not make their donations known as they prefer to donate privately.

Yes, you're right. On the Donation Page, you are given the choice of donating privately or not.

Helping with the Freepathon as I do, I can say that more ARE private than not.

[Brad’s Gramma]

as some freepers do not have the financial means to donate

Absolutely.....and NO ONE SHOULD BE MADE TO FEEL as if they HAVE to!!!

[Wiz]

Wikipedia is hijacked by liberals. What did you expect? They justify their views as neutral point of views claiming it as the way of Wikipedian but the truth is that their liberal views are neutral point of views in their term while the reality it is totally biased. When anything is against their liberal views, they edit it and will say that they are Wikipedians and the editing does not respect the Wikipedian community. What is to be done? There should be more Conservative moderators to get in, and over number the Liberal moderators, by Conservatives promoting other Conservatives to be moderators. Next, let the Conservative moderators push the Conservative's NPOV and any revert war to end with the liberals kicked out.

[dalight]

This is just a pointless bit of fluff. This post like so many posts describes things in relentlessly negative terms. Condescension, scorn and contempt. It is perhaps accurate as far as it goes but as usual relentlessly biased and unbalanced and thus sheds more heat than light on the subject.

It reminds me of the Wikipedia article on Tom DeLay which is simply a litany of charges unsubstantiated but viciously repeated with very little explanation of why this man is so powerful and well liked.

[BigSkyFreeper]

Toddler must have added that into the Wiki entry.

[Xenophon450]

You should see the search results for "Robert E. Lee". They don't exactly like him.

[Xenophon450]

Hell, they spend more time Bashing Lee as a bigoted slave owner than his military career...

[CalRepublican]

Are you talking about my post? I'm pointing out that Wikipedia is trying to play down unbelievable traffic by comparing FreeRepublic to websites that aren't comparable. For a news forum website, Freeperland dominates.