Conservapedia

"We have certain principles that we adhere to, and we are up-front about them, Beyond that we welcome the facts."

In other words, To hell with the truth if it conflicts with their opinions.
A conservative's answer to Wikipedia is terribly skewed to the right just because this guy got a bug up his ass. Among the things he has a problem with: "How about Wikipedia's entry on golfer Zach Johnson, winner of the 2007 Masters? Not a single word about how Johnson gave credit for his win to Jesus Christ." If he felt that strongly about this detail, he should log into Wikipedia, add the quote, site his reference and "fix" the problem.

That's what's beautiful about Wikipedia, it is not a left or a right thing. By it's design, it is as unbiased of a system as you can have. No it's not perfect, but if everyone who edits an article would site their references, then it would be as close as we could get. There is of course room for idiots out there to inject malicious junk into an article they didn't like.

There was no real need to re-invent the wheel here. This is just another douche bag standing up and getting attention so that the world can see that he loves Jesus. WWJD? Most likely slap some sense into him.