Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[Plum Smuggler]

The 'editor' (I hesitate to even call them that) literally has no other contributions other than this deletion nomination. Possible Challenor sock?

View attachment 6155288

Let's see if Wikipedia notorious fine comb against "single issue editors" will notice this, or if they will ignore it because it is a ideologically pure case.

Although the person who nominated for deletion has no history another editor has concerns with dissenters.

https://archive.ph/kfjan

 

[glue eater]

Featuring another tranny janny:

Why do you disagree with me, it's the current year??? I came across him, complaining about Alternative for Germany on a talk page.

 

[Bill Kilgore]

Featuring another tranny janny:

View attachment 6163573View attachment 6163570

Why do you disagree with me, it's the current year??? I came across him, complaining about Alternative for Germany on a talk page.

Lol. Lmao even.

 

[TheOtherOne]

"...in our articles" Not even trying to hide that there's a cabal of jannies lol

 

[glue eater]

It's so simple, I am just astonished neither I nor anyone else saw it. I found the master list of lolcows:

List of transgender wikipedians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Transgender_Wikipedians

Because, let's face it, if you're a wikipedo and a troon, you're a lolcow, at least a minor one.

Spotted on a random wikitroon's page:

"Pickle cabal", I would say so, yeah. New euphemism for janny tranny just dropped.

 

[Ewan McGregor]

It's so simple, I am just astonished neither I nor anyone else saw it. I found the master list of lolcows:

List of transgender wikipedians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Transgender_Wikipedians

Because, let's face it, if you're a wikipedo and a troon, you're a lolcow, at least a minor one.

Spotted on a random wikitroon's page:

View attachment 6164303

"Pickle cabal", I would say so, yeah. New euphemism for janny tranny just dropped.

Ew, french. I mean, that's the one that gives him as a weirdo.

 

[Briananderson1138]

Found at random on that page.

 

[scathefire]

I had no idea about all that “WikiFauna” shit until I saw the WikiPuppy thing above. It seems way more autistic than something actually useful.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Has anybody noticed Wikipedia's awful new user interface? How do I change it back?

IDK if you are open to having an account but I do and you can change the interface to any throughout Wikipedia's history. I've been rocking the 2010 Vector Legacy and it's perfect

 

[Danann]

Not sure if this on topic for dumb shit, but what I find dumb as of recently is the increasingly more aggressive stance on going with public domain images or truncated screenshots/pictures of something to not get any copyright strikes despite them being fair use. Is there something I missed since it seemed to have occured around 2019-2020.

 

[UnsufficentBoobage]

I find dumb as of recently is the increasingly more aggressive stance on going with public domain images or truncated screenshots/pictures of something to not get any copyright strikes despite them being fair use

It resulted in incredibly creepy images on some stuff. Also, very nice seeing a photo from like '58 on some illnesses' pages, badly scanned black-and-white and all.

 

[Danann]

It resulted in incredibly creepy images on some stuff. Also, very nice seeing a photo from like '58 on some illnesses' pages, badly scanned black-and-white and all.

Hmm yeah I can understand that, but still its very stuffy to just go with making the Wikipedia as "FREE" as possible from copyright. I'd not be surprised if there were some pro-copyright chuds who approved of it.

 

[WhiteNight]

It resulted in incredibly creepy images on some stuff. Also, very nice seeing a photo from like '58 on some illnesses' pages, badly scanned black-and-white and all.

The most extreme case I recall is the article for Tanana, Alaska:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanana,_Alaska

The main image for the town (in the infobox) is a postcard photo from 1910. Lower down, there's a photo of the post office from 1920. Can no one produce a picture of what the town looks like that is less than a century old?

 

[General Emílio Médici]

You would think that WikiMedia foundation would be able to fork a few thousand bucks to pay wikipedos to take pictures and copyright them to WikiMedia itself so they can make them free use. That would solve the problem.

But nah, better off funding brazilian feminists to write articles about literal who women in portuguese or paying sheboons to kill expensive lab animals by negligence.

 

[Baraadmirer]

Wikipedia isn't really my bag so I thought I would link this here. I noticed an editor is trying to 86 the Aimee Challenor article. Challenor is a really fucked up troon, babyfur, pedo, etc.. who was involved with the Greens and Labour Party.

https://kiwifarms.st/threads/aimee-...id-challenor-aimee-knight.47181/post-18751903

Archive in the event it gets deleted.

 

[Drama Fan]

It's probably just beating a dead horse for regulars of this thread, but I'll post it anyway because it's definitely relevant. TracingWoodgrains, independent journalist and former of Blocked and Reported producer, wrote quite a long article on wikipedia autist admin David Gerard and the blatant ways wikipedia uses Reliable Sources™ to launder narratives. Trigger Warning: very fucking long
https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/reliable-sources-how-wikipedia-admin (archive)

Wikipedia’s job is to repeat what Reliable Sources say. David Gerard’s mission is to determine what Reliable Sources are, using any arguments at his disposal that instrumentally favor sources he finds agreeable. The debate, to be clear, is not between tabloids and the New York Times, a battle the Times cleanly wins. In Gerard’s world, scientists and academics who publish in Quillette or Reason are to have even their opinions discarded entirely, while to cast any doubt on the reliability of the word of Huffington “the truth is not in them” Post and PinkNews is absurd.

From there, it’s simple: Wikipedia editors dutifully etch onto the page, with a neutral point of view, that Huffington Post writers think this, PinkNews editors think that, and experienced Harvard professors who make the mistake of writing for The Free Press think nothing fit for an encyclopedia.

 

[AnOminous]

You would think that WikiMedia foundation would be able to fork a few thousand bucks to pay wikipedos to take pictures and copyright them to WikiMedia itself so they can make them free use. That would solve the problem.

They'd probably get sued as angry pedophiles would stalk celebrities and try to take unflattering pictures of them while making death threats against them, just to get their unflattering pictures as the official Wikipedo pictures on their page. They've always done that but they're a lot worse about it now.

Lots of people worthy of articles in a real encyclopedia (Wikipedo is not one of those) would refuse to give permission to these scum to infringe their copyrights.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

The most extreme case I recall is the article for Tanana, Alaska:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanana,_Alaska

The main image for the town (in the infobox) is a postcard photo from 1910. Lower down, there's a photo of the post office from 1920. Can no one produce a picture of what the town looks like that is less than a century old?

It's a town of 246 Native Americans in the absolute middle of nowhere in Alaska. They have better things to do than take a picture of their village for Wikipedia. They probably wouldn't want a picture of their village online since my guess is it's like every other Indian town and is full of poverty and alcoholism and corruption.

 

[Markass the Worst]

It's probably just beating a dead horse for regulars of this thread, but I'll post it anyway because it's definitely relevant. TracingWoodgrains, independent journalist and former of Blocked and Reported producer, wrote quite a long article on wikipedia autist admin David Gerard and the blatant ways wikipedia uses Reliable Sources™ to launder narratives. Trigger Warning: very fucking long
https://www.tracingwoodgrains.com/p/reliable-sources-how-wikipedia-admin (archive)

He's also a RationalWiki fuckwit.

 

[glue eater]

Intersection of Reddit and Wikipedia.

Not sure if this on topic for dumb shit, but what I find dumb as of recently is the increasingly more aggressive stance on going with public domain images or truncated screenshots/pictures of something to not get any copyright strikes despite them being fair use. Is there something I missed since it seemed to have occured around 2019-2020.

Ultra-rare-Wiki-sanity-moment: Some ex-Axis countries, at least Germany and Finland, categorize all their war time photos as CreativeCommons-4 (public property), so all Nazi/Fascist related articles are very well illustrated.

Well, less of a WikiSanity moment and more of a German/Finnish dub. I know Wikipedia is extremely autistic when it comes to this. For the longest time King Jon Un and Breivik had some terrible drawn photos because all existing photos belonged to some newspapers. Long time Wiki browsing farmers remember.