|This page was nominated for deletion on 23 November 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.|
Surely 'card stacking' means exactly the same thing as bias. Card stacking seems to mean presenting a biased case. In the example of 'card stacking becomes a problem in objective stories such as news stories and scholarly works', if you replace the term with 'bias', the sentence is identical. I'm confused! 184.108.40.206 (talk) 11:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps I'm a little dense today, but I can't understand why this article is marked as non-neutral.
- I think it's "A feminist group might focus exclusively on violence of men against women, for example, and ignore all cases of violence by women against men, as if none exist." meanwhile referring to the practice as "a propaganda technique." Why does the article specifically call out this "feminist propaganda" but no others? It seems more NPOV to stick to expressing the more general concept of 'only using statistics that are to its advantage,' but it doesn't seem either of the final two examples are at all necessary. Varuka (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
- Agreed, feminism as presented is a loaded example, not good to use it demonstratively. Altering the example and removing the tag. RomaC (talk) 07:54, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
Card stacking, like the term says
I suggest that, the original term, gets to be the main article, since this article even refers to the other one as to where the term originated, that alone is an indication, that this article ain't the most siginificant displayed under this term. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:42, 19 July 2010 (UTC)