Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.
My personal favorite
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:High-functioning_autism_and_Asperger's_editors
Wikipedia is the ultimate honeypot! If a group of researchers had been given the task of creating a working/hobby environment specifically designed to attract high-functioning autistics, they could not have come up with anything better than Wikipedia!
Click to expand...
People losing their shit in the talk section
752033


The final boss of mental illness
752036


Another interesting article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fucking,_Austria

Bonus Soccer mom pearl clutching in the talk section.
752042


And finally I have to post this
752046

:story: :story: :story:
 
  • Like
  • DRINK!
  • Informative
Reactions: Blatant hypocrite, Kaede Did Nothing Wrong, Eryngium and 15 others
  • Like
Reactions: Karl_der_Grosse, Crunchy Leaf, Syaoran Li and 1 other person
The section on Gender is the second longest section in the Toys article. The only section that's longer is History, and even then it's not by much and is further subdivided into two subsections which are both shorter than the Gender section. That's not even getting into the actual content of the section which is a ton of stupid:

Gender (1).png
Gender (2).png
 
  • Horrifying
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Corpun, Elim Garak, Dededon't and 10 others
The problem with Wikipedia is that, unlike a traditional encyclopedia that has printing costs to consider, there is simply no limit on article length. Consequently, people who are extremely spergy about a particular topic can unleash this wherever they want. You can also see this applied differently but by the same principle on every article about mathematics, which will be full of long complex equations and explanations that are totally obtuse to the casual reader.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Corpun, Elim Garak, ToroidalBoat and 9 others
From the KF article

On December 7, 2017, William Atchison opened fire on students at Aztec High School in Aztec, New Mexico. Atchison proceeded to kill two students before committing suicide. It was reported that Atchison was involved with Kiwi Farms, and that his username was FuckYou.[10] Atchison was subsequently mocked for carrying out the shooting by other users on Kiwi Farms, and was given his own thread. Kiwi Farms users referred to Atchison as "couch cuck", allegedly due to his attack being stopped when a teacher barricaded a classroom door with a couch.[citation needed]
Click to expand...
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Cyclonus
Crunchy Leaf said:
The problem with Wikipedia is that, unlike a traditional encyclopedia that has printing costs to consider, there is simply no limit on article length. Consequently, people who are extremely spergy about a particular topic can unleash this wherever they want. You can also see this applied differently but by the same principle on every article about mathematics, which will be full of long complex equations and explanations that are totally obtuse to the casual reader.
Click to expand...

That's almost a reverse problem, though. Wikipedia has absolutely gorgeous markup for mathematical subjects, and I can't blame their resident mathematicians for using it as much as they possibly can. This is also magnificent for math that's actually within your grasp. The articles on a subject have all you need. Some of them are masterpieces.

The problem is that if it's something even just slightly out of your grasp, it's completely impenetrable, which is the opposite of encyclopedic. So the math articles are great for refreshing yourself on something you already understand but terrible for actually learning.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Syaoran Li, millais and 7 others
TheImportantFart said:
The section on Gender is the second longest section in the Toys article.
Click to expand...
And as far as I can tell, only the English version has such a long section. The Spanish version doesn't even have one, and the Japanese version has just a short couple of paragraphs.

Google Translate of "gender" section of https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%8E%A9%E5%85%B7 said:
Certain toys, such as Barbie dolls and GI Joes, are divided into girls or boys. Studies have shown that infants younger than 18 months have different toy choices by gender [35].

Even in Japan, "boy's toy" and "girl's toy" are classified separately in the industry classification etc. The former includes model toys and vehicles, and the latter includes dolls and their peripheral tools. Character dolls and toys for pretend play are also divided for boys and girls, respectively [36] [37].
Click to expand...


It's as if the world beyond the West doesn't obsess about shoving identity politics into everything.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, Syaoran Li, Iwasamwillbe and 4 others
AnOminous said:
That's almost a reverse problem, though. Wikipedia has absolutely gorgeous markup for mathematical subjects, and I can't blame their resident mathematicians for using it as much as they possibly can. This is also magnificent for math that's actually within your grasp. The articles on a subject have all you need. Some of them are masterpieces.

The problem is that if it's something even just slightly out of your grasp, it's completely impenetrable, which is the opposite of encyclopedic. So the math articles are great for refreshing yourself on something you already understand but terrible for actually learning.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, it looks great! But I know I've stumbled too far into Math Wikipedia when they have not only Greek letters but also Hebrew ones. It's not very encyclopedic, that's my problem with it. Imagine if every science page was written like it was in an academic journal. How I feel about math over there.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Mr. Awesome Man and AnOminous
AnOminous said:
I'd be personally weak delete if I bothered with these things at all any more. I'm not even sure this is SJW so much as categoryfagging.
Click to expand...
is that a term? i'm a member of a genealogy website that's based on the idea of a wiki (so everyone's tree is connected, it's not just you in a vacuum) and people are NUTS about categories. people will make the most specific categories for everything, especially occupations, and then other people will bitch about it, and then people start attacking each other. and the average age is like 65. i feel like people can't resist the urge to overcategorize.
 
Crunchy Leaf said:
The problem with Wikipedia is that, unlike a traditional encyclopedia that has printing costs to consider, there is simply no limit on article length. Consequently, people who are extremely spergy about a particular topic can unleash this wherever they want. You can also see this applied differently but by the same principle on every article about mathematics, which will be full of long complex equations and explanations that are totally obtuse to the casual reader.
Click to expand...
Like say...this. Which has actually been edited down substantially since the first time I stumbled upon it.

List of Bob the Builder characters - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Crunchy Leaf said:
wouldn't that be like, most japanese video game characters? wikipedia people love making lists of shit there's no need to make lists of
Click to expand...
Yeah, but the idiots on Wikipedia don't consider that what they perceive as Caucasian characters are often intended to be Japanese. Said characters have light skin and indistinct facial characteristics that make them racially ambiguous, but Wikipedia editors are xenophobic racists who think all Asian characters should have slanted eyes and buck teeth.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: kittyhou, Elim Garak, Creep3r and 3 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back