Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

  • Winner
  • Like
  • DRINK!
Reactions: Lord Xenu, UnsufficentBoobage, lolcow yoghurt and 7 others

Editing is locked so that they can call RFK Jr. all sorts of names and there is a debate on merging his 2024 campaign article.

Just look at the opening and the photo they use. They try and make him look as close to Sloth from the Goonies as possible.

rfkjr.png
 
  • Lunacy
  • Informative
  • Dumb
Reactions: Lord Xenu, I Love Huge Long Chode, BlueSpark and 4 others
Corpun said:

Editing is locked so that they can call RFK Jr. all sorts of names and there is a debate on merging his 2024 campaign article.

Just look at the opening and the photo they use. They try and make him look as close to Sloth from the Goonies as possible.

View attachment 5174241
Click to expand...
I enjoy seeing 4+ citations on one "fact". If you check history at the dawn of mainstream troonery, you'll find some pronouns with half a dozen citations. YES MS. JENNER IS A SHE.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I Love Huge Long Chode and Corpun
Corpun said:

Apparently this exists, including an autistic list of everything removed. It still isn't as big or as detailed as the one on all the shit that got renamed or taken down in the wake of St. Floyd's overdose.
Click to expand...
It's nice to get reminders about how childish the Hohols are about the fact that they are Little Russia. Of course, it can't be worse than replacing a statue of Catherine the Great with some male porn star (in a city that she founded!)
 
  • Like
  • Mad at the Internet
  • Dumb
Reactions: Wright, St.Davis, UnsufficentBoobage and 6 others
Omen_Sulk said:
Trannies aren't really helping themselves labelling all these mass rapists/murderers as trannies.

View attachment 5175849

Click to expand...
Why?

If they can call 13/50 or 6/50, even with overwhelming evidence, racist* why can't they do this with Troons?

*
Note the ADL doesn't even attempt to explain why its racist, its racist because the ADL says it is.
P.S. There are weak attempts to explain away 13/50 but they don't stand up to cursory review.

Here is the more first article I found and its apologia:
  • However, according to this same FBI source, when one includes the thousands of homicides in which the race of the perpetrator was listed as unknown, this number drops to 39.6 percent
Rebuttal (Southern Poverty Law Center)
In a report released Thursday titled Race and Hispanic Origin of Victims and Offenders, 2012-2015, the DOJ’s Bureau of Justice Statistics found that a majority of most violent crimes are committed by people who are the same race as their victims.
Click to expand...
  • when the United States Justice Department conducted an investigation into policing in Ferguson, Missouri, they found “substantial evidence of racial bias among police and court staff”
Rebuttal (City Journal citing New Jersey Turnpike Study)
Black drivers speed twice as much as white drivers, and speed at reckless levels even more. Blacks are actually stopped less than their speeding behavior would predict—they are 23 percent of those stopped.
Click to expand...
This is important because while Ferguson has a Black population below stop rate, the surrounding areas have populations per capita above it. Therefore, it could be argued that Blacks are stopped per capita less.
  • Furthermore, poverty is among the leading causes of crime in the United States
Rebuttal:
KFCrimePoverty.jpg
In 2017 for NYC, Asians had a poverty rate of 23.8% while Blacks had a poverty rate of 20.4%. Yet, when it comes to murder suspects the rate for Asians is 3.6% while Blacks are 61.7%.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
  • Thunk-Provoking
  • Like
Reactions: Lord Xenu, Lowlife Adventures, I Love Huge Long Chode and 7 others
Calandrino said:

Which one is YOUR favorite, K-Farmers?
Click to expand...
In her 2003 book The Holocaust and Antisemitism: A Short History, Jocelyn Hellig wrote:[168]

Michael Curtis has pointed out that no other group of people in the world has been charged simultaneously with the following, among others:
Curtis points out that "this catalogue of contradictory accusations cannot possibly be true because no single group of people could feasibly have such a total monopoly on evil."[169]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Both these citations are to the same exact source. Could they not have just put one in? Love that they threw this contradiction thing in as if your average anti-semite thinks these things at the same time.
 
They obviously throw as many citations as they can to try and flood the market. More citations = better data obviously.

But I agree that the argument is dishonest. Those sort of accusations have all been thrown at jews yes but not at the same time, and most obvious not ALL at the same time AND every time. The people who are mad at Jews for being christ killers are NOT gonna be the same that go for pagan LARP and insist it is a jewish plot.

And that is not even mentioning the ones that are not contradictions at all if you ever actually paid attention to the insult or understood the context of the hate. For example: "Being a chosen people, but having an inferior human nature" isn't a contradiction at all because the claim here is the Jews see themselves as chosen but the antisemite sees them as being inferior. Or "Upholding a rigid law while also being morally decadent" assumes that rigid law means you could never be morally decadent, which is retarded because law and morality are not the same thing.

In short: Kvetching.
 
  • Feels
  • Agree
Reactions: Useful_Mistake, Corpun, I Love Huge Long Chode and 1 other person
One thing beyond the bias is that Wikipedia's sourcing rules are extremely flawed. I've seen multiple things that were completely wrong on Wikipedia becuse they sourced to articles that simply repeated rumors and hearsay that were tantamout to urban legend. It's even sometime as stupid as two people having the same name, and suddenly some rando is credited for things they had no hand in creating. It's really absurd.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: I Love Huge Long Chode and Fat Tub of Lard
Mothra1988 said:
One thing beyond the bias is that Wikipedia's sourcing rules are extremely flawed. I've seen multiple things that were completely wrong on Wikipedia becuse they sourced to articles that simply repeated rumors and hearsay that were tantamout to urban legend. It's even sometime as stupid as two people having the same name, and suddenly some rando is credited for things they had no hand in creating. It's really absurd.
Click to expand...
Their sourcing rules aren't flawed, they are exactly as designed: to facilitate the pushing of the narrative they want to push.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: UnsufficentBoobage, Blasterisk, Corpun and 2 others
Barry McKockner said:
Their sourcing rules aren't flawed, they are exactly as designed: to facilitate the pushing of the narrative they want to push.
Click to expand...
Not every article on Wikipedia is a politics or culture war. The fact that the rules have been leveraged by leftists does not mean that was the original intent. That's the point of taking over institutions. It doesn't mean they invented them. If I recall, the original intent of people like Sanger was for it to have "neutral point of view," and Sanger out right criticizes the left wing bent it has now. Things going to shit isn't always a conspiracy theory. It's things going to shit.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Lord Xenu, I Love Huge Long Chode, Dambusters' Dog II and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back