Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[Throng of Titans]

A hentai loving, communist, weeaboo, brony Greek is who is controlling the information your friends and family members read. Really think about that for a second.

It's funny how I'd always get warned that Wikipedia is unreliable because anyone can edit it, but the problems weren't from randos maliciously changing things, but turbo basement dwellers who basically operated the site.

 

[Sicko Hunter]

It's funny how I'd always get warned that Wikipedia is unreliable because anyone can edit it, but the problems weren't from randos maliciously changing things, but turbo basement dwellers who basically operated the site.

100%. The problem with Wikipedia is politically motivated autists like Gorillawarfare who dedicated thousands of hours to pushing their own agenda not random people editing it which 99.9% of the time results an an almost instant reverting.

 

[AnOminous]

He is a Greek man

So tell me he's a pederast without just telling me he's a pederast.

Also lmao nigga has more badges than a North Korean General.

100%. The problem with Wikipedia is politically motivated autists like Gorillawarfare who dedicated thousands of hours to pushing their own agenda not random people editing it which 99.9% of the time results an an almost instant reverting.

It isn't whores like Gorilla who are the problem. It's the absolute abdication of responsibility of the fake ArbCom that allows these freaks to run rampant and completely control the fake encyclopedia.

 

[Ewan McGregor]

list of last words

I like that St Floyd is featured just below St Rodger.

It's like cosmic balance.

highlights

You forgot that he mentions being depressed.

Greek

Southern European lefties are really something else...

 

[Sicko Hunter]

I like that St Floyd is featured just below St Rodger.

It's like cosmic balance.

That's not a Floyd quote it's Eric Garner another black guy who insisted on fighting the police and yelling out I CAN'T BREEF instead of complying and not dying.

 

[Ewan McGregor]

That's not a Floyd quote it's Eric Garner another black guy who insisted on fighting the police and yelling out I CAN'T BREEF instead of complying and not dying.

How... suspicious, I would say.

 

[RealtreeByGod]

The fact that someone took the time to make special graphics for this song is pretty silly and ridiculous

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_in_the_Street

 

[JJLiautaud]

How... suspicious, I would say.

No its niggers engaging in magical thinking that if they just utter the right words they won't get in trouble.

 

[WhiteNight]

The fact that someone took the time to make special graphics for this song is pretty silly and ridiculous

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_in_the_Street

This one has even more locations mapped, for different song variants:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27ve_Been_Everywhere

 

[Chaos Theorist]

So what online encyclopedia should I be reading?

 

[JJLiautaud]

So what online encyclopedia should I be reading?

depends you should try to find an encyclopedia specialized in the topic at hand.

 

[TheySeeMeRowlin]

 

[DeadwastePrime]

View attachment 6061309

seems about right

 

[Bucephalus]

The fact that someone took the time to make special graphics for this song is pretty silly and ridiculous

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dancing_in_the_Street

Nah, they didn't. It's just an automated template. You pull up a map template, punch in the coordinates of whatever cities you want to plot on it, assign labels to them, and Wikipedia poots a new map out for you.

Here's the source:

{{location map+|USA|float=center|width=500|caption=Cities in which there is dancing in the street (Martha Reeves version)<ref>{{cite web |title=Dancing in the Street - Martha Reeves and the Vandellas |url=https://genius.com/Martha-reeves-and-the-vandellas-dancing-in-the-street-lyrics |website=Genius|access-date=21 July 2023}}</ref>|places=
{{Location map~|USA|lat=41.88|long=-87.63|label=[[Chicago]]|position=left}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=29.97|long=-90.08|label=[[New Orleans]]|position=bottom}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=40.71|long=-74.01|label=[[New York City]]|position=top}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=39.95|long=-75.16|label=[[Philadelphia]]|position=right}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=39.29|long=-76.62|label=[[Baltimore]]|position=left}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=38.90|long=-77.02|label=[[Washington, D.C.]]|position=bottom}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=42.33|long=-83.05|label=[[Detroit|Detroit (Motor City)]]|position=top}}
{{Location map~|USA|lat=34.05|long=-118.25|label=[[Los Angeles]]|position=right}}
}}

 

[General Emílio Médici]

I for one vastly prefer the autism on Wikipedia be them making maps where the cities a song mentions in passing to make a rhyme are located than trying to rewrite history and trying to force consensus against common sense and evidence for political pushes.

 

[Bucephalus]

So what online encyclopedia should I be reading?

...Britannica, I guess?

The problem is that there aren't any viable alternatives to Wikipedia. It's virtually impossible for a start-up to compete with something that has 6.8 million articles, 23 years of brand recognition, and a small army of jannies sweeping it up for free.

 

[Big Nasty]

No its niggers engaging in magical thinking that if they just utter the right word they won't get in trouble.

It it the same reasoning SovCits use,but on a street nigga level.

 

[TheySeeMeRowlin]

I think there may be enough on Dronebogus to create a lolcow thread on Kiwi Farms about him:

https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=2876

I found out about the extensive Wikipedia Sucks thread about him from this thread about him on the Sharty: https://soyjak.party/raid/thread/123664.html

The guy is a pedophile, troon activist, degenerate autist who constantly creates chaos and drama on Wikipedia and is protected by the admins, even when he uploads bizarre sexual fantasy shit to Wikimedia Commons and his own Wikipedia userspace (while constantly trying to get other users banned for doing much less and often succeeding at getting them banned).

His entire Wikipedia career can be summed up in these two images that he created (and uploaded to Wikimedia Commons):



His futanari uploads - which are two of his waifu userboxes on his Wikipedia userpage - appear to have been taken down as of right now.

After reading the Wikipedia Sucks thread, what do you all think? Lolcow-worthy?

I also think that the Wikipedo troon LilianaUwU could potentially have a lolcow thread on here as well:

https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=2569

https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=3326

https://wikipediasucks.co/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=3005

Thoughts, Kiwis?

 

[306h4Ge5eJUJ]

I think there may be enough on Dronebogus to create a lolcow thread on Kiwi Farms about him:

What a character. I definitely think this guy has enough material for a thread, but I feel for the poor fuck who has to fish it out of the endless Wikipedia discussions.

 

[Romeo]

Here's a black-pill and a white-pill.

One of the greatest articles I've ever read in Wikipedia was about Ian Smith, the Prime Minister of Rhodesia. You would expect from the left-wing bias of the site to think that a white man who led a white-minority government of an African nation against the orders of decolonization by the British would has his reputation defaced in this article. However, this page surprised me in a way that I pretty much binge-read it thoroughly and got me interested in Rhodesia. (I highly recommend you read it, preferably the versions between 15 March 2014 to 21 April 2020 for reasons to be explained later)

8 February 2014 version​

The intent of the article written by the retired Wikipedia user Cliftonian (his edits) was to analyze the tragedy that surrounds this question: was Smith an unabashed racist that many African leaders and the British have labelled him as, or was Smith a committed leader who attempted to make the best out of Rhodesia's situation for both whites and black against all odds? The article is surprising extremely neutral, of which it mentions people, both black and white, who revered Ian Smith, but also mentioned Smith's most prominent critics and opponents, including the Zimbabwean government and the British government. The article then finally shows in his Legacy section that in the end, black Zimbabweans expressed sadness when Smith died, and thus Smith is permeated as a positive figure compared to the black nationalists that have since ruled the country following the dissolution of Rhodesia.

On 8 February 2014, Cliftonian had this article reviewed for good article status by a user from Madagascar named Lemurbaby, who then referred the Ian Smith article as one of the top 100 best articles that he has ever read on Wikipedia. Encouraged by this, Cliftonian then nominated the article for Featured Article status on 8 March 2014, of which admins Tim Riley and Brian Boulton approved it, with the latter referring the article as the one of the best political biographies that he has ever read and commended Cliftonian for handling such a controversial yet deep figure. Cliftonian has devoted similar treatments to many Rhodesia-related articles such as the Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) which warranted significant praise to become a featured article by admins such as Nick-D and Tim Riley back in August 2013 and the pro-apartheid Rhodesian politician and Battle of Britain war veteran William Harper which also allotted similar praise from admins such as Boulton, American user Coemgenus, and South African user and apartheid-analyst Katangeis in April 2016.

Wikipedia's articles on Rhodesia are among the best in the site because thanks to Cliftonian's efforts, the articles uses detailed neutral language and information backed by highly reliable citations that saw light into Rhodesia's most prominent events and figures, and thus plays up to Wikipedia's strengths in comparison to other encyclopedias on the subject because of the reason above. Unfortunately, these articles will soon have to face the shifting tides as the website grows even more left-leaning during the late 2010s and 2020s. In 2018-2019, several activist users came up to attack the Ian Smith article as "white-washing", "pro-Smith," and "not negative enough" with a thorn up their ass: Zubin12, a Singaporean, and SharabSalam, a Yemeni user. During this timeframe, Cliftonian retired from Wikipedia in the beginning of January 2019 and purged all remnants of his presence on the site.

​

​

Some lunacy by a-logs and reasonable responses to them​

Finally, Zubin12 reported the article in April 2020 (hence the dates above) to the admins at the time to review it for demotion from featured article of which the admins at that time (including Nick-D) soon removed the featured article status and good article status since the Ian Smith article relied too much on primary sources that were too "pro-Smith." The admins soon went after Cliftonians' other Rhodesia-related articles that were labelled as featured articles and the Rhodesia's UDI and William Harper were both dethroned as featured articles. At this point, you would think this article would be pozzed to a revision of newer historical sources that will deface Smith, and you'll be almost correct. Several users have asked for rewrites because the article hasn't been changed much and still has that "pro-Smith" bias following the article's demotion from being a featured article.

​

​

Well in the end, your notions are wrong, and the Ian Smith article has remained unmolested for the most part. Several of the "pro-Smith" and "anti-Mugabe" language was neutralized in the lead section and changes were made to Smith's legacy section to make it more "neutral-sounding." Nevertheless, the last sentence of the article still represents the final view that sums up the treatment of Ian Smith's article by Wikipedians, "if Zimbabweans had to choose between Smith and Mugabe, it would not be Mugabe." In addition to the article's critics, the Ian Smith article still has lots of supporters within the Wikipedia community, even a user (Katangeis) who specializes in writing on the horrors of apartheid in South Africa saw the Ian Smith article as neutral and doesn't need to be changed. UDI and William Harper's articles were also unmolested as of this post.

Rational in a sea of revisionism​

In the end, the revisionists of Wikipedia could not implement these changes because there are still Wikipedia users who have read the article saw only neutrality and have prevented significant revisions. In the end, the users who demanded change of this article to fit a pozzed narrative have simply become inactive in the site.

• Ian Smith is still not categorized as a "white supremacist" in Wikipedia's category/tagging system.
• The article still mentions how there are critics who took the first sentence of Smith's quote, "I don't believe in majority rule ever in Rhodesia—not in 1,000 years. I repeat that I believe in blacks and whites working together. If one day it is white and the next day it is black, I believe we have failed and it will be a disaster for Rhodesia" to make him look like a racist.
• The article remarked Smith's legacy to include his role as the prominent and loved leader of the democratic opposition against Mugabe's tyranny.

At this point, you can still link people the Wikipedia article on Ian Smith because the article is still THAT good, and it will remain my hidden gem and a whitepill on Wikipedia to share with you guys.