Conservapedia is a Web site that began in November 2006 as a class project for a world history class of 58 home-schooled and college-bound students meeting in New Jersey.
The site’s mission statement reads, “Tired of liberal bias every time you search on Google and a Wikipedia page appears? Now it’s time for the Conservatives to get our voice out on the Internet.”
The site features articles that include creationist and conservative religious views. For example, Conservapedia’s article on dinosaurs has a section entitled, “Creationist scientists perspective,” followed by a shorter section entitled “Evolutionary scientists perspective.”
Conservapedia also differs from its predecessor Wikipedia, in that, while Wikipedia has a global network, Conservapedia only has contributors nationwide.
According to the site, however, it “is becoming one of the largest and most reliable online education resources of its kind.” However, many professors, librarians and students at N.C. State question this claim.
When Stephen Sherman, a graduate assistant in the Reference Department of D.H. Hill Library, typed ‘paperback’ into the Conservapedia search browser, he received the response “There is no page titled ‘paperback.’ You can create this page.”
Wikipedia, on the other hand, does have a page on paperbacks.
“Wikipedia has been around for some time and has people that have contributed,” Sherman said. “People contributing is what makes a site like this work.”
Sherman said he would not recommend that students use the site for research.
“We understand students like to use sites online such as Google for research, but we caution that some things won’t be authoritative,” Sherman said. “We wouldn’t point students towards sites that have explicit bias written into their purpose.”
Jonathan Ocko, head of the history department, said he had findings similar to Sherman’s, but added he would not recommend either Conservapedia or Wikipedia as a valid reference source.
Ocko also noted that many of the links on Conservapedia’s site do not work. However, he recognized the same as Sherman that this may be because the site is fairly recent.
Ocko, too, understands that students gravitate toward online sites for information because of their convenience. However, Ocko said he would prefer students use sites such as Google Scholar or JSTOR.
These sites have what Ocko referred to as, “a genealogy of knowledge,” which allows students to see who contributed to the article, as well as, what the references are.
Ocko said the more credible sources will have been peer reviewed. He also recommended Cambridge Encyclopedia and Oxford Encyclopedia Britannica as good starting points.
“Books may have biases as well,” Sherman said. “The general principle is to evaluate sources.”
