Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

[BootlegPopeye]

So Wikipedians took what seems to have been propaganda as historical fact because someone cited it on their shitty blog? Good to know they have quality.

Not shocked at all. I expect Suleiman the "Magnificent' is likewise whitewashed despite being a bloodthirsty conqueror who had an army of castrated slaves raised from childhood after being stolen from their parents. Articles on the Ottoman Empire are probably all patrolled regularly by Turkish Nationalists and Lefty types who want to whitewash that blight on the world.

Oh bad Ottoman revisionism has a nice long pedigree, there was even a story of the shitty Doctor Who TV show about the Crusaders, who were naturally depicted as bad but the Turks as wise and tolerant. Probably some of that earlier Ottomanphilia comes from latent Protestantism, who sometimes put the Turks in a favorable light because they had a shared Catholic opponent (however, popular sentiment at the time of the Ottoman wars was against this, and when the Turks lost the Battle of Lepanto, church bells in Lutheran lands also rang in celebration).

Slavery in the Ottoman Empire

A large percentage of officials in the Ottoman government were bought slaves,[8] raised free, and integral to the success of the Ottoman Empire from the 14th century into the 19th. Many slave officials themselves owned numerous slaves, although the Sultan himself owned by far the most.[5] By raising and specially training slaves as officials in palace schools such as Enderun, where they were taught to serve the Sultan and other educational subjects, the Ottomans created administrators with intricate knowledge of government, and fanatic loyalty. The male establishment of this society created links of recorded information, even though speculation is present for European writings.[further explanation needed] However, women played and held the most important roles within the Harem institution.

See! Women 'held the most important' role over other female sex slaves/rape victims. It was kinda-sorta progressive slavery!

 

[Corpun]

Oh bad Ottoman revisionism has a nice long pedigree, there was even a story of the shitty Doctor Who TV show about the Crusaders, who were naturally depicted as bad but the Turks as wise and tolerant. Probably some of that earlier Ottomanphilia comes from latent Protestantism, who sometimes put the Turks in a favorable light because they had a shared Catholic opponent (however, popular sentiment at the time of the Ottoman wars was against this, and when the Turks lost the Battle of Lepanto, church bells in Lutheran lands also rang in celebration).

Slavery in the Ottoman Empire



See! Women 'held the most important' role over other female sex slaves/rape victims. It was kinda-sorta progressive slavery!

That's absolutely insane. Ottoman Apologia will always cite muh Harem of Women but forget they were fucking sex slaves, Islamic slavery was by far a much larger and more deadly trade than the Trans-Atlantic ever was, and has it's roots in the Middle Ages when North African Muslims would raid as far as Iceland. But I'm sure the Barbary Raids were actually empowering somehow or not as bad as they were for reasons.

I really am sick of this Crusaders bloodthirsty barbarians while Muslims were peaceful and wise that is so prevalent in media nowadays. Everyone was shitty to each other in the Middle Ages and no, Medieval Christians weren't lunkheads who believed whatever bullshit nuhistorians say about them and went around burning Greek texts. What do those retards think countless monks spent lifetimes preserving and transcribing?

 

[Josterman]

 

[Lucille Bluth]

It amazes me to see how someone's nationality and ethnic background can cause so much sperging. Wikipedia users seem to be actively against calling a Welsh or Scottish person "British" and if someone from the U.K has dual citizenship, well... The only reason why the pages for people like Anthony Hopkins and Saoirse Ronan are protected is because of all shit flinging on whether or not they should be called "Welsh" or "Irish" and if their dual American citizenship should be mentioned. And this applies to many other people who possess multiple citizenship or are of a certain ethnicity or were born in a country that is different from their passport.

After years of Ronan's page saying "Irish and American", it was recently decided that "American-born Irish" is the "best fit", simply because the users all said so.

Saoirse Ronan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[AnOminous]

Not shocked at all. I expect Suleiman the "Magnificent' is likewise whitewashed despite being a bloodthirsty conqueror who had an army of castrated slaves raised from childhood after being stolen from their parents. Articles on the Ottoman Empire are probably all patrolled regularly by Turkish Nationalists and Lefty types who want to whitewash that blight on the world.

Most countries generally like their own murderous badasses. The only real exception is when they actually fucked up the country and left it a wreck. So Atilla the Hun, Gengis Khan, Basil the Bulgar Slayer, Vlad the Impaler, are generally pretty popular in their countries. Adolf Hitler, who left his country in flaming ruins after killing himself like a pussy? Not so popular. But compare Yukio Mishima. He was a huge flaming homo fascist who also killed himself, but did it like an absolute badass.

 

[Corpun]

For whatever reason Makhno's little headshot has the title his followers game him. I have never seen this done for any king, president, or any other political figure besides Catholic saints and beatified figures like Kaiser Karl.

My guess? Some anarkiddie loves sucking that terrorist's cock.

 

[Iron Jaguar]

Adolf Hitler, who left his country in flaming ruins

He left Germany in ruins.

 

[AprilRains]

He left Germany in ruins.

yeah and I'm sure Austria was just fine

 

[Maricón de Mierda]

Today, I stumbled upon Wikipedia user RedAlert 007. User page here. Archive.

He 's pretty much just your garden variety Wikipedia loser user, but I think this image summarizes those morons quite well.

The same people editing pages on Australian drone aircraft are also getting into flamewars on Macrophilia's talk page. Macrophilia is giant and giantess porn, if you can't keep your fetishes straight. And if you were curious, Aimee Challenor is some British troon politician that resigned in the wake of, you guessed it, pedophilic tweets. Here's a pic if you want to see a 22-year old pedophile:

 

[Zbk3VmLfujjzjxBd43tL]

So Wikipedians took what seems to have been propaganda as historical fact because someone cited it on their shitty blog? Good to know they have quality.

It's repeated in several scholarly works that Mehmed II raped "attractive" male youth he owned as slaves or held hostage (like Vlad and his brother Radu), that's where I encountered the comment about Vlad the Impaler being raped by Mehmed. I'm sure there's other works trying to disprove those assertions or cast it in the light of "we don't know, sounds like propaganda."

Not shocked at all. I expect Suleiman the "Magnificent' is likewise whitewashed despite being a bloodthirsty conqueror who had an army of castrated slaves raised from childhood after being stolen from their parents. Articles on the Ottoman Empire are probably all patrolled regularly by Turkish Nationalists and Lefty types who want to whitewash that blight on the world.

Is it any surprise the Ottomans look better when their primary enemy, the Spanish Empire, is among the most intolerant states in history known for forcing all Jews and Muslims to convert or GTFO and then keeping the new converts around as second class citizens legally barred from all sorts of things and watched by the Spanish Inquisition. They also killed millions of natives in the New World through forced labor in mines and plantations and in the process almost totally depopulated the Caribbean before they could bring in black slaves from Africa.

 

[Shmuel "Sam" Coinsniffer]

Only caught this one because someone tried to remove it and got reverted: Kenosha Kid is listed under "right-wing terrorism".

 

[BootlegPopeye]

Only caught this one because someone tried to remove it and got reverted: Kenosha Kid is listed under "right-wing terrorism".

View attachment 2669413

They always have this needless line 'after 9/11' because it would obviously distort the (false) point they are attempting to make - that white right wingers cause most terror attacks. But why is 9/11 separated out? 2001 isn't exactly ancient history. Oh, because it would dismantle the bullshit line they are going for.

Yet, you can see that they cite Timothy McVeigh and various Order attacks, all of which happened before 2001. So we can cite pre 2001 stuff when its convenient? It's almost like there isn't a good reason at all to not include 9/11.

 

[Oats12345]

Only caught this one because someone tried to remove it and got reverted: Kenosha Kid is listed under "right-wing terrorism".

View attachment 2669413

I wonder what will happen when Rittenhouse wins his court case considering many of the people assign that case seemed to be in favor of him. Wikipedia will lose their shit.

Also Wikipedia are defending a dead pedo(not surprisingly)

 

[Shmuel "Sam" Coinsniffer]

I wonder what will happen when Rittenhouse wins his court case considering many of the people assign that case seemed to be in favor of him. Wikipedia will lose their shit.

Also Wikipedia are defending a dead pedo(not surprisingly)

It will be covered in the "He did it even tho he wasn't convicted" tone of the KKK lynchings of early 1900s. Quite interesting that the total opposite case, where Leo Frank was rightfully convicted of raping and murdering a little girl and then tried to pin the blame on his "nigger beast" (defense's words) employee, is treated as innocent in the article because people were, understandably, antisemitic against him, and that makes the conviction null and void and racist.

 

[No. 7 cat]

It's repeated in several scholarly works that Mehmed II raped "attractive" male youth he owned as slaves or held hostage (like Vlad and his brother Radu), that's where I encountered the comment about Vlad the Impaler being raped by Mehmed. I'm sure there's other works trying to disprove those assertions or cast it in the light of "we don't know, sounds like propaganda."

Is it any surprise the Ottomans look better when their primary enemy, the Spanish Empire, is among the most intolerant states in history known for forcing all Jews and Muslims to convert or GTFO and then keeping the new converts around as second class citizens legally barred from all sorts of things and watched by the Spanish Inquisition. They also killed millions of natives in the New World through forced labor in mines and plantations and in the process almost totally depopulated the Caribbean before they could bring in black slaves from Africa.

Philip II only expelled Moslems after savage rebellion. Jews had a proven record from assisting Moslem invaders against their Visigothic king Roderic to supporting the Ottomans in their endeavours. Spain ended the slavery of the natives after the efforts of Fra
Bartolomé de Las Casas. The slavery of blacks was comparatively less in Spanish territories for there was a large peasant class. So many Latin American countries are heavily or majority native which compares to their near disappearance in north America.

 

[scathefire]

It amazes me to see how someone's nationality and ethnic background can cause so much sperging. Wikipedia users seem to be actively against calling a Welsh or Scottish person "British" and if someone from the U.K has dual citizenship, well... The only reason why the pages for people like Anthony Hopkins and Saoirse Ronan are protected is because of all shit flinging on whether or not they should be called "Welsh" or "Irish" and if their dual American citizenship should be mentioned. And this applies to many other people who possess multiple citizenship or are of a certain ethnicity or were born in a country that is different from their passport.
View attachment 2667111
After years of Ronan's page saying "Irish and American", it was recently decided that "American-born Irish" is the "best fit", simply because the users all said so.

Saoirse Ronan - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think the Scottish and Welsh just hate when you call them British even though it's technically correct, to the point where it almost seems like a social no-no to do so.

 

[Oats12345]

I think the Scottish and Welsh just hate when you call them British even though it's technically correct, to the point where it almost seems like a social no-no to do so.

Isn't John Rhys-Davis a Welsh actor who has played many British characters and is often mistaken for being British. Form what I read he doesn't get angry when people confused him for being British

 

[Sicko Hunter]

Some of you will remember two years back when an old hippie attempted to firebomb an ICE detention center in Tacoma, Washington. Most of you probably don't since it's pretty well memory holed. Here is the Wiki page on it. It's one of the most politically dishonest and ass kissey articles I've read to date. First you notice there is no mention of "Far-left activist" or "far-left extremist" anywhere on the page. He's simply introduced by his name despite him writing out his political motives for doing what he did and literally claiming himself to be affiliated with Antifa

The description of the attack is filled with the passive aggressive homo quotes they love like "who they claim", "who was reported to" to describe police officer testimony's about how this insane old fuck with a rifle was throwing lit bombs at propane tanks and the building. Refusing to stop until they shot him.

More "I claimed" shit about him actually being in Antifa. Notice how they leave out the part where he wrote a manifesto for the last sentence? A literal call to arms against the government goes last I guess.

They then follow this up by shift into talking about how he really was a nazi hunting civil rights activist who just took it too far with a totally trustworthy study showing Antifa never killed no one. I'm sorry, wasn't this an article on a domestic terrorist? Why is this even here?

Then the best part of all this act of domestic terrorism was tagged as... a fucking protest? A man armed with a rifle throwing bombs at a federal building is a protest according to Wikipedia. Note, again, none of the tags mention his blatant far-left ideology aside from the "anarchism in the United States" tag.

2019 Tacoma attack - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

2019 Tacoma attack - Wikipedia

archived 29 Oct 2021 20:29:37 UTC

archive.md

 

[Thumb Butler]

Bigot, he was merely protesting by trying to kill people.

 

[murgatroid]

Today, I stumbled upon Wikipedia user RedAlert 007. User page here. Archive.

He 's pretty much just your garden variety Wikipedia loser user, but I think this image summarizes those morons quite well.
View attachment 2668242
The same people editing pages on Australian drone aircraft are also getting into flamewars on Macrophilia's talk page. Macrophilia is giant and giantess porn, if you can't keep your fetishes straight. And if you were curious, Aimee Challenor is some British troon politician that resigned in the wake of, you guessed it, pedophilic tweets. Here's a pic if you want to see a 22-year old pedophile:

View attachment 2668272

He also resigned because he hired his dad for his campaign who was also a pedo/rapist/sex pest.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-father-despite-knowing-stand-trial-rape.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...-captive-acted-sadomasochistic-fantasies.html