18+
Este site é para maiores de 18
18+

conservapedia.com é seguro?

Este site é suspeito

1.6
starhalf-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
(621 Avaliações)
Reivindicar este site
Pergunte à nossa comunidade
Compartilhar:
Compartilhe seus pensamentos...
starempty-star
Medíocre
starempty-star
Razoável
starempty-star
Mediano
starempty-star
Bom
starempty-star
Excelente
621 Avaliações da comunidade
Ordenar por:
Recentes
A proteção online mais confiável
Mar 24, 2015
The poor ratings for this site are typical of what I've seen on many conservative websites: political sabotage. For some absurd reason, liberals seem to think that anything conservative must be full of hate. That is simply not true. I usually rely on the WOT ratings...except when it comes to conservative sites. This particular site is nothing more than a resource for finding other conservatives and conservative organizations.
Útil
Mar 22, 2015
Seems fine. Has some strong opinions on certain subjects, and is obviously right-leaning.
Útil
Mar 20, 2015
starstarstarstarhalf-star
This site is no worse that moveon.org!
Útil
Mar 19, 2015
starstarstarstarstar
There's nothing malicious about this site. People are up in arms due to differing opinions and claims this site makes. Site is SAFE to visit.
Útil
Mar 11, 2015
starstarstarstarhalf-star
Liberal losers hate truth. Read their comments for proof. " hate speech, racism, or discrimination." You're really reaching you communist hacks.
Útil
Mar 7, 2015
starstarstarstarstar
People claim that this site is biased and yet seem to be unable to exclude their own political bias in rating the site. That's called hypocrisy.
Útil
Feb 26, 2015
starstarstarstarhalf-star
It's a political site. Those downgrading disagree with the politics of the site and that is not a good reason to downgrade it.
Útil
Feb 26, 2015
starempty-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
The most untrustworthy encyclopedia ever. Full of lies, lies and more lies, Just read any article and you know what i'm saying. It's a personal blog and not a informative neutral source.
Útil
1
Feb 24, 2015
starstarhalf-starempty-starempty-star
This website is a wiki-based online encyclopedia. It is written from a conservative Christian point of view, making it somewhat biased and unreliable as a research tool. The encyclopedia claims to be a trustworthy source of information, when some of its pages--especially those with topics pertaining to politics--are plagued with bias and inaccuracies. Also, the website includes biased, controversial, or offensive content, such as content which states that "women are weaker than men". However, most of the pages on the encyclopedia are child friendly.
Útil
2
Feb 22, 2015
The only reason this is labeled poorly is because of politics. I am very disappointed in this service and it has lost value to me because of the poor vetting service. WOT is actually being used as a censor service. You should question Wikipedia then too: http://www.conservapedia.com/Examples_of_Bias_in_Wikipedia http://www.novanglus.org/2012/09/the-web-of-trust-wot-has-become-a-tool-for-political-censorship/ I will be removing myself from this service.
Útil
Jan 29, 2015
Nothing but propaganda from the American Right.
Útil
1
Jan 28, 2015
starstarstarstarempty-star
I don't find any of those negative claims on this site. People should have their rights to express their opinion, without being judge of discrimination, hate, and/or racism. If that claims are true, you must also rate Wikipedia the same way you rate this website...
Útil
Jan 25, 2015
starhalf-starempty-starempty-starempty-star
Extremely biased and misleading. Articles are either uncited or come from unscientific sources such as right-wing opinion articles and creation science websites, rather than anything even remotely peer reviewed. Most facts are cited from articles on the website "creation.com" Here are some of the absurd claims: "Homosexuality was accepted in Nazi Germany" "Evolutionary belief is linked to bestiality" "Liberals typically support child pornography" On science, it pushes a feeling of oppression rather than peer-reviewed facts; that Evolutionary Biology is only taught because science has been controlled by atheists who want to brainwash children out of their religion. It is utterly absurd. It also doesn't even try to hide its bias. In articles, the "liberal community" is often used and is preceded by terms like "licentious" and "immoral." The article on liberals itself is filled with specific presumptions about belief on modern laws, rather than the actual definition. It's hard to tell if this website is a joke or just plain crazy. There is absolutely no way the bad ratings for the website are simply because of "liberal bias" or "liberals oppressing free speech." Both conservatives and liberals should be opposing this because it is one of the most deceptive websites on the internet.
Útil
1
Dec 23, 2014
The people who are voting this site down are doing so because they have differing political views, not because it's a bad site.
Útil
Dec 14, 2014
Only Liberals are marking this site bad. This site is fine.
Útil
Dec 10, 2014
starstarstarstarhalf-star
People posting as misleading claims or unethical are those who are not objective. Looking at both sides of the spectrum leads to clear understanding. These are probably the same people who rely solely on the HuffPo as a source for "reliable" information. It is best to read information from many sources and form your OWN opinion; not be led by the minions.
Útil
Dec 5, 2014
starstarstarempty-starempty-star
I do not agree with all the views presented on this site, but I believe people need to hear both point and couterpoint to make an informed decision. I would not consider this site an authority for research. (I wouldn't consider wikipedia an authority either as it is subject to the last edit of anyone with an account.) The subjects addressed offer a counterpoint argument to those provided and on radical or liberal websites about social issues. Therefore, this site is useful in understanding the viewpoint of a subset of the American political spectrum, -Evangelical Christians. It should be viewed on a par with sites such as move.org, ffrf.org, slate.com, humanevents.com or any other politically motivated sites. I label the the child safety as be cautious as I believe these are issues best addressed with parental guidance. I label this ste suspicious as there are some opinions presented that disregard factual evidence that supports scientific theories widely accepted at this time.
Útil
Dec 1, 2014
starstarstarstarempty-star
An alternative viewpoint site. Nothing more. Anyone describing it as "not safe for kids" is a blatant liar trying to stifle free speech.
Útil
Dec 1, 2014
starstarstarstarstar
This is apolitical site, that does not agree with the left. That's who has been giving it bad ratings. This organization has been around for nearly 100 years, and is a responsible organization and offers another choice for Americans deciding who to vote for. Their politics are simply conservative, not malicious in any way. The left has struck again. Sigh.
Útil
Nov 9, 2014
starstarstarhalf-starempty-star
Ironically, I went to see what it said about political correct speech. Just because you don't agree with a site doesn't make it unsafe. I know the left would die for the cause of free speech (as long as its speech they agree with) but trying to silence others is fascistic.
Útil
«
678
...
32
»

Sobre este site

Confiabilidade
32
/100
Segurança da Criança
35
/100
This site uses cookies for analytics and personalised content. By continuing to browse this site, you agree to our cookies policy
Accept