[Greg F]

Is it worth fighting the fight on Wikipedia?

[RatherBiased.com]

Definitely. Or should I say Absolutly.

Kidding aside, though, if you figure out how to word facts that support conservatism in a reasonably objective manner, your edits will stay in articles.

I’ve done it for years with articles. A lot of conservatives make the mistake that just because they don’t think Wikipedia is credible, no one else thinks so. This is far from the case.

Wikipedia matters a lot because its pages are so prominent in Google searchs. Most times when you’re looking for something, the Wikipedia entry for it will pop up as the #1 link. Almost always in the top five. This is a huge opportunity for the right since the rest of the top sites on the web (Wikipedia is #9 in the world) shut out conservative voices through editorial processes and hiring biases.

The only reason Wikipedia leans left is because more conservatives aren’t out there doing their part to make it fair.

[jdm]

Probably not. As soon as you change something, someone else with more seniority will change it back.

[goldstategop]

I think it is. What's needed is to turn Wikipedia into a true encyclopedia. That means giving an objective treatment of the facts and leaving partisan disagreement to other forums. If you want a particular view, you should be free to browse a site that shares your view. Wikipedia as an information resource is too important to be abandoned to the Left.

"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Yes. We’re not the only ones who look at it.