And Conservapoodia isn't exactly comprehensive, neither. Googling my favourite pop pianist Russ Conway (my mother was into him in a big way, so I guess her playing his albums in my youth influenced my music taste that way), his entry in Wikipedia was the first thing to come up:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russ_Conway
When I tried on Conservapoodia, what came up?:
'No page title matches
There is no page titled "Russ Conway"'
Similarly it was the first thing, when I Googled the harmonica player Larry Adler:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Adler
And again on Conservapoodia:
'No page title matches
There is no page titled "Larry Adler"'
Strange with the latter, especially when Larry Adler was one of those condemned as a Communist by Joseph McCarthy's witch hunts, which forced Larry, and many other people in Hollywood, particularly screenwriters etc to go into exile in the UK in the 50s (remember "Robin Hood" and "William Tell", with many of their episodes' plotlines that mirrored McCarthyism?).
So I guess that if it isn't something or someone who doesn't involve right-wing politics today - or at least someone he can character assassinate* - or his fundie beliefs, it isn't relevant in his online encyclopaedia. Least of all if it isn't American.
Oh yes, that's focussing on 'learning and teaching', Schaftafly.
*- President Obama's entry in Conservapoodia is basically the verbal equivalent of what happened to JFK in Dallas. If you believe in your Bible, Andy, have you ever heard of Romans 13:1-7? Oh, and one more thing, concerning Obama's entry in your online encyclopaedia:
'Wikipedia is a like a 3rd grade essay contest that gives points for more words. Here, we focus on learning and teaching'
And considering the word count in such:
http://www.conservapedia.com/Barack_Obama
Not exactly conciseness or 'less is more' as you claim, eh? Just goes to prove what I always say: Hypocrisy, thy name is Fundie.
