Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[Munchingonfish]

Nina Freeman has had articles written about her in Edge and GamesTM probably the two most legit gaming publications outside of industry journals. Her wikipedia page does contain references to the Guardian (lol) and the Washington Post (lol). She's hardly Kim Swift or Jade Raymond but she's somewhat notable in the indie games scene.

My issue is that Wikipedia values coverage over any real life notability. Approved outlets running a story about you isn't a sign you're an influential creator. The bar is too low and bent out of shape to hold that as a bellwether.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

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

One of my favorites. A blow-by-blow account (using the battle infobox normally used on actual historical battles) of when some 19th century India prince decided to make a lion and tiger fight.

Related:

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

A long-ass article comparing who would win and detailing all potential encounters of tigers and lions. Tagged for disputed neutrality, so fanboys of one of the animals must be butthurt about something.

But can a Tiger and Lion tag team defeat a tag team made up of a Hippo and a Grizzly Bear?

My issue is that Wikipedia values coverage over any real life notability. Approved outlets running a story about you isn't a sign you're an influential creator. The bar is too low and bent out of shape to hold that as a bellwether.

I understand the point you are making but Nina Freeman is a bad example as she is at least notable for that Cibelle game for better or worse.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erin_Robinson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merritt_k
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephanie_Harvey

These are examples are people who shouldn't have Wikipedia articles

 

[millais]

 

[Hellfire]

At the talk page of Jimbo Wales, someone claims Donald Trump funded Gamergate and paid people to edit war about it on Wikipedia to swing the elction to his favor. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=815693174&oldid=815643857#FYI:_GamerGate_was_a_funded_Trump_campaign_operation

 

[TheImportantFart]

This is from the talk page for Richard Spencer's article. It's a bunch of (I presume) leftists absolutely terrified of having to admit they have any views in common with him. The mental gymnastics are glorious. What's funniest is that they say they can't be sure the Twitter account is his because it's not verified when the Wiki page itself documents his de-verification by Twitter :

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

At the talk page of Jimbo Wales, someone claims Donald Trump funded Gamergate and paid people to edit war about it on Wikipedia to swing the elction to his favor. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=815693174&oldid=815643857#FYI:_GamerGate_was_a_funded_Trump_campaign_operation

View attachment 339298

View attachment 339299

The amount of power these people attribute to Gamergate and the alt-right is astounding. They literally believe the "/pol/ memed Trump to the presidency" meme.

 

[Xerxes IX]

Based on the page's history it's just one guy who edited that in a few weeks ago. What puzzles me is that there have been edits since then by other users and no one has removed it. I can only assume that other editors of the page saw it as useful information which kind of says something about Wikipedia's user base even if it is a minor article.

I just kind of leave weird or obviously factually incorrect edits people stick in alone out of curiosity in seeing how long it will take someone to fix it. I very rarely bother to edit anything on Wikipedia because it doesn't seem worth it.

I mean,

LOL, WE DID THIS FAGGOT:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.ph...&type=revision&diff=815409498&oldid=814980108

http://archive.is/CjSI7

here you can see that on Wikipedia the motive for @FuckYou 's shooting was Kiwi Farms and ED for a while, and this stayed up for several days.

 

[Chaos Theorist]

The amount of power these people attribute to Gamergate and the alt-right is astounding. They literally believe the "/pol/ used reality warping chaos magic utilizing ancient Egyptian gods and repeating digits to get Trump to the presidency" meme.

FTFY

 

[GethN7]

At the talk page of Jimbo Wales, someone claims Donald Trump funded Gamergate and paid people to edit war about it on Wikipedia to swing the elction to his favor. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jimbo_Wales&type=revision&diff=815693174&oldid=815643857#FYI:_GamerGate_was_a_funded_Trump_campaign_operation

View attachment 339298

View attachment 339299

O RLY?

I was BALLS DEEP in this GamerGate shit at one point, no one waved money in front of my face, and if Trump was tossing out money in exchanging for pimping a hashtag, I'm pissed I missed out on a payday.

But seriously, these fucking morons will believe anything, and they want to cite their gasoline huffing addled delusions as FACT?

MY. FUCKING. SIDES.

 

[Chiang Kai-shek]

Muh Zionist conspiracy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:USS_Liberty_incident

 

[Darwin Watterson]

Check out their article on the video game, Slain!

Several sections just repeating the same shit over and over. What's the story of this game? Who's the protagonist? Who did the music? All these questions and more will not be answered. From this article, you can learn that:

• It's an action platformer
• It was poorly received upon release, so the developers retooled it as Slain: Back From Hell, which was given more favorable reviews
• That's about it

 

[AnOminous]

I considered becoming a frenzied deletionist on Wikipedia for all the garbage articles like this, but soon recognized one thing.

These are all created by incredibly autistic people.

Well, okay, two things.

Autistic people fiercely defend their territory like Ryulong.

Why is it worth the trouble? These morons will spend their entire lives defending their own mistranslation from Japanese, which you don't even give a shit about, while shitting up a worldwide "encyclopedia."

The problem with Wikipedia is the people who know the least about the subjects they defend are vastly more dedicated than the people who actually do know the subjects, who are usually busy actually working in those subjects, and rapidly lose interest in improving Wikipedia when their attempts to introduce actual information into the nonsense is rejected by basement dwellers with shelves full of piss bottles floor to ceiling.

 

[The Fool]

I considered becoming a frenzied deletionist on Wikipedia for all the garbage articles like this, but soon recognized one thing.

These are all created by incredibly autistic people.

Well, okay, two things.

Autistic people fiercely defend their territory like Ryulong.

Why is it worth the trouble? These morons will spend their entire lives defending their own mistranslation from Japanese, which you don't even give a shit about, while shitting up a worldwide "encyclopedia."

The problem with Wikipedia is the people who know the least about the subjects they defend are vastly more dedicated than the people who actually do know the subjects, who are usually busy actually working in those subjects, and rapidly lose interest in improving Wikipedia when their attempts to introduce actual information into the nonsense is rejected by basement dwellers with shelves full of piss bottles floor to ceiling.

This is what academic papers are for, and is why academic papers are used as sources everywhere, and not wikipedia articles.
Wikipedia is a joke and is only good for looking up basic trivia and everyone knows this.

 

[Raging Capybara]

This is what academic papers are for, and is why academic papers are used as sources everywhere, and not wikipedia articles.
Wikipedia is a joke and is only good for looking up basic trivia and everyone knows this.

https://twitter.com/realpeerreview


"Papers" are worse than wikipedia. And the wikipedia's sources are these "respected" papers anyway, who cares?

 

[Darwin Watterson]

I haven't seen this posted here yet, an article on some random brony that seriously reads like the guy wrote it himself.

Donald "Dusty" Rhoades, also known by his online alias Dustykatt, is a YouTube celebrity and online talk show host as one of the more recognizable faces of the adult brony fandom for the show My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic. As a 49-year-old male with a handlebar moustache and a motorcycle enthusiast, Rhoades has been given the title "The Manliest Brony in the World"

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Here's some weird Engrishy article on a follower of Muhammad. The awkward writing is amusingly bad.

 

[Big Nasty]

I haven't seen this posted here yet, an article on some random brony that seriously reads like the guy wrote it himself.

"Manliest brony" is kinda on the same level as "sexiest retard".

 

[Diesel Boogaloo]

Here's some weird Engrishy article on a follower of Muhammad. The awkward writing is amusingly bad.

Most Islam-related articles are like that. They usually assume that the reader already knows what the article is about, because they as hell won't learn it from reading the article.

Example I encountered some time ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahruf What can we learn from it? The first sentence says that ahruf are related to Quran and there are seven of them. The second says that they are not qira'ats (luckily, the qira'at article is better). The third is a hilarious example of "he said that he said that he said" which in the Islamic world is considered the only acceptable form of epistemology, and in the West is considered gossip. The rest of the article, while still keeping the "he said" style, gives some hints to what it is all about, but it's still absolutely confusing.

(And to spoil all your fun, ahruf are different versions of early Quran that differ from each other by single words here and there.)

 

[Positron]

"Manliest brony" is kinda on the same level as "sexiest exceptional individual".

Or "the least autistic Wikipedia editor".

 

[AnOminous]

"Manliest brony" is kinda on the same level as "sexiest exceptional individual".

I read that and "handlebar mustache" and hear "homosexual."