Wikipedia, too liberal?

As this week's class readings and discussions have been centered around Wikipedia and questioning authority, I was reminded of an NPR All Things Considered segment I listened to a number of months ago. Since Wikipedia's inception, the accuracy of its content has been a concern of educators, librarians, and anyone who relies on the collaboratively assembled information found within its pages. Until listening to the aforementioned NPR segment however, I had yet to hear the view that much of the information found on Wikipedia has a liberal slant. The radio piece was about a relatively new alternative online encyclopedia called Conservapedia. Can a massive collaborative pool of information authored by miscellaneous volunteers have a deliberate slant one way or the other? Of course, depending on who authors an individual piece, an article may present one side more than another, but Wikipedia as a whole? When it comes down to it, I would argue that any piece of information, though sometimes subtle, reflects the beliefs and ideologies of the individual author. Do I personally think that Wikipedia has a political agenda? Not that I've directly observed. From an information studies perspective it is interesting to read the sometimes highly disparate views between articles listed in Wikipedia and Conservapedia, and if you haven't done so already, it is definitely worth your time!