Here is a comment I made on Redditerino asking someone politely to not use Rationalwiki as a source and I provided a source as to why not.

I said, and quoted part of the text to show:

Please don't link to Rational Wiki. They are incredibly biased and selective with their facts.

http://lesswrong.com/lw/f5b/the_problem_with_rational_wiki/

While factually it is as about as accurate as Wikipedia, it is very selective about the facts that it is interested in. For example what would you expect from a site calling itself "Rational Wiki" to have on its page about charity[2] . Do you expect information on how much good charity actually does? What kinds of charities do not do what they say on the label? How to avoid getting misled? The ethics of charity? The psychology, sociology or economics of charity?

The user went on to edit their comment and change the link and messaged me, because they agreed with me.

Yet my comment sits in the negatives, and the only reply is putting words in my mouth and saying "topkek."