Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[AnOminous]

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.

I've heard some editors deliberately pick the ugliest ass pictures possible of celebrities either because wrongthink or because they refused a request for permission.

 

[Lone Star]

I've heard some editors deliberately pick the ugliest ass pictures possible of celebrities either because wrongthink or because they refused a request for permission.

Makes me shocked Donald Trump's is so normal. If anyone would have an ugly-on-purpose pic it'd be him.

 

[Rusty Metal Skull Gun]

Makes me shocked Donald Trump's is so normal. If anyone would have an ugly-on-purpose pic it'd be him.

One quirk of American copyright law is that the federal government can't own copyright, so anything that relates to that tends to have high-quality pictures. This includes NASA

 

[glue eater]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020s_anti-LGBT_movement_in_the_United_States#Protections_for_minors

The Wikipedia article on "Anti-LGBT movement" has a subsection about states that mutilate children's genitals titled "protections for minors". As in, genital mutilation is the protection. Honk honk.

 

[Corpun]

Makes me shocked Donald Trump's is so normal. If anyone would have an ugly-on-purpose pic it'd be him.

It's really only because every President's wikipage uses an official portrait. It's why we don't see hospice Jimmy Carter as the first pic. One bizarre picture change, at least for me, is changing Elizabeth II's from elderly smiling grandma that it was for years to a picture of her in the 50s. It's really odd given she was alive and a reigning queen up until a few years ago.

 

[BootlegPopeye]

It's really only because every President's wikipage uses an official portrait. It's why we don't see hospice Jimmy Carter as the first pic. One bizarre picture change, at least for me, is changing Elizabeth II's from elderly smiling grandma that it was for years to a picture of her in the 50s. It's really odd given she was alive and a reigning queen up until a few years ago.

There is some semi-official rule that that for Living people with Wikipedia articles, the most recent picture is favored, and if they are deceased, then a picture from the period from when they were most well-known. That's why the main picture of Veronica Lake is her in her prime and not when she was a downtrodden drunk much later.

But with Queen Elizabeth you could just take your pick, 1950s 2010s all of those would work.

 

[AnOminous]

Makes me shocked Donald Trump's is so normal. If anyone would have an ugly-on-purpose pic it'd be him.

I think they actually have a rule always to use the official portrait for exactly this reason. Making a one time exception just for Trump would probably be too blatant even for
>current year
Wikipedia.

 

[Bucephalus]

The orange man's been shot.
Let's see what Wikipedia's up to. (archive)

Spoiler: ⚠️WARNING: LARGE IMAGE ⚠️

 

[Wright]

The orange man's been shot.
Let's see what Wikipedia's up to. (archive)

Spoiler: ⚠️WARNING: LARGE IMAGE ⚠️

View attachment 6187206

Not surprisingly that whole article seems rather fucky at the moment. I went onto the Wikipedia homepage at random, decided to click on the Former US president Donald Trump (pictured) survives an assassination attempt hyperlink and this is the page it gave me.


(Archive from 07:17 edit)


Was writing something else originally but then I realized this ^ in inspect element about halfway through it. Not something I've seen before TBH, it's technically the normal article but with a giant opaque chunk overlaid proclaiming the lack of difficulty in assassinating a president. It lasted only about a minute and 3 edits from 07:17 to 07:18, hasn't popped up again since. Very weird.

 

[glue eater]

I know people have brought up Trump's article on Wikipedia before, but here's a new take, and from an actual established user with 170k edits, not some random probably trolling IP:

That's right, Trump was shot by the Nazis.

 

[Bucephalus]

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.

This is the intro to Kim Jong-un's page circa 2015.



I am actually in awe at how hard they're riding his dick here. They don't even get into the human rights violations under his regime or the threats of nuclear annihilation until the article's halfway point.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

Not surprisingly that whole article seems rather fucky at the moment. I went onto the Wikipedia homepage at random, decided to click on the Former US president Donald Trump (pictured) survives an assassination attempt hyperlink and this is the page it gave me.

View attachment 6189093
(Archive from 07:17 edit)
View attachment 6189130

Was writing something else originally but then I realized this ^ in inspect element about halfway through it. Not something I've seen before TBH, it's technically the normal article but with a giant opaque chunk overlaid proclaiming the lack of difficulty in assassinating a president. It lasted only about a minute and 3 edits from 07:17 to 07:18, hasn't popped up again since. Very weird.

When I went to bed about 11 hours ago, the homepage said "a possible assassination attempt" which really goes to show how desperate they are to minimize this.

This is the intro to Kim Jong-un's page circa 2015.

View attachment 6189761

I am actually in awe at how hard they're riding his dick here. They don't even get into the human rights violations under his regime or the threats of nuclear annihilation until the article's halfway point.

I don't really mind that because it's what I'd expect from a neutral encyclopedia, although it has too much fluff with how focused it is on his ranks and titles rather than his accomplishments and actions as leader. It's a shame the average right-wing politician in the West doesn't get such neutral coverage.

 

[Plaintiff is fat]

vid about the inventor of the toaster hoax

 

[TheySeeMeRowlin]

Wikipedia editors are insisting on using "gender-neutral" pronouns for Trump's shooter since we don't know his gender identity yet.

These people are beyond parody.

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

https://archive.is/DdBRW

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

The notion of a "second Holocaust" (Hebrew: השואה השנײה, romanized: HaShoah HaShniyah) or "Another Holocaust" (שואה נוספת, Shoah Nosephet), also known in white supremacist parlance as Anudda Shoah, is an assertion that the Holocaust or a similar event is recurring or will recur.

As they say, a good article should reel you in with the headline and first paragraph.

There's a lot of funny Jewish content on the rest of the page too.

Before he came to power, Menachem Begin compared accepting reparations from Germany to allowing "another Holocaust".[8] Before the 1982 Lebanon war, Begin told his cabinet: "Believe me, the alternative to this is Treblinka, and we have decided that there will not be another Treblinka". He also justified Operation Opera, the 1981 bombing of an Iraqi nuclear reactor, by stating that by ordering the strike he had prevented another Holocaust.

In his 2009 book on genocide, Worse than War: Genocide, Eliminationism, and the Ongoing Assault on Humanity, Harvard professor Daniel Goldhagen argues that Palestinian suicide attacks should be called "genocide bombings", and their perpetrators "genocide bombers".

In 2019, Israeli education minister Rafi Peretz compared Jewish intermarriage in the United States to a "second Holocaust"

 

[Jobama]

Wikipedia jannies already arguing over wether or not to use the photo of Trump with a raised fist.

 

[glue eater]

Damn that's crazy, as if TiMs were just autistic men.

 

[AnOminous]

As they say, a good article should reel you in with the headline and first paragraph.

There's a lot of funny Jewish content on the rest of the page too.

Bombing an Iraqi nuclear reactor was still a good idea.

Wikipedia jannies already arguing over wether or not to use the photo of Trump with a raised fist.
View attachment 6191926

Lmao they KNOW. They're in a huge tizzy about how do you pretend to be a real "encyclopedia" while ignoring the most important image of the year.

Fun fact: Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia. It is a propaganda outlet with only one purpose, to push leftist swill as actual truth.

 

[Toolbox]

This is the intro to Kim Jong-un's page circa 2015.

View attachment 6189761

I am actually in awe at how hard they're riding his dick here. They don't even get into the human rights violations under his regime or the threats of nuclear annihilation until the article's halfway point.

How the fuck is the only imagery of him on that page a sketch that hilariously romanticizes him over how he actually looks?

One of the last real dictators of possibly the most infamously considered country in the public eye, and they got some tumblrina to sketch him. I would have thought this was some obese k-pop idol, not Kim Jong Un if you had shown this to me without context. Awful.

 

[Sicko Hunter]

I know there really isn't much of an OP to this thread but I really feel like this image belongs in it.

(Spare me the late ratings I know this has been posted before)