Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

I'm glad that Fandom now exists for 13 year old video game fans to go ballistic about weapons trivia about video games, but even then, that place exists solely to both contain and neutralize that as well as provide a better place for trivia and analysis of media than Wikipedia and TV Tropes. And even then, elitist dipshits exist to write things their way out on Wikipedia, and Fandom is also beginning to showcase massive signs of mod power hunger.
 
View attachment 991162

Huh, who knew George Lucas was Nostradamus?
here is a neat trick- this page can tell you the authorship of any specific sentence. so the paragraph you quoted was added by user UpdateNerd. he really likes star wars and has made 359 edits to the article for the upcoming rise of skywalker. lives up to his username I guess. I'm just going to post his wookiepedia picture but the guy has also shared way more personal information than is smart imo.
Screen Shot 2019-10-31 at 2.37.56 PM.png

not that random star wars fan hating trump is unique or interesting. just kind of crazy how much information wikipedia archives. I like snooping.
 
On the article on BitChute (a YouTube alternative sans the censorship), it brings up BitChute's supposed connection to "far-right" immediately after explaining what/why BitChute is.

The platform has been accused of accommodating far-right individuals and conspiracy theorists,[8] with the Southern Poverty Law Center claiming the site hosts "hate-fueled material".[9]
 
Last edited:
wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has launched a new social media platform, WT:Social, founded with a specific aim to fight fake news. and you have to pay a monthly subscription to use it. archive
Wikipedia's Jimmy Wales has quietly launched a Facebook rival social network
Would you pay to join a social network? Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales thinks up to 500 million people could.

Liam Tung
By Liam Tung | November 15, 2019 -- 13:25 GMT (05:25 PST) | Topic: CXO


DEVELOPER
Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales has quietly rolled out a new social network that is intended to get right what Facebook and Twitter have so far been getting wrong.
The new social network, WT:Social, which Wales announced had 25,000 members on November 6, now has about 78,000 members who are at least intrigued by the idea of a social network that combats fake news.
The site goes against the ad-funded models normalized by Google, Facebook, and Twitter, instead asking users to pay a subscription fee to access information and communicate on the site.
It costs $12.99 a month or $100 a year in the US, or €12 a month or €90 a year in Europe. It's £10 and £80 in the UK. In other words, about the same as a Netflix or Spotify subscription. However, questions remain over what content WT:Social can provide that users would be willing to part with money for.
SEE: Digital transformation: A CXO's guide (ZDNet special report) | Download the report as a PDF (TechRepublic)

The social network is a reboot of WikiTribune, which launched in 2017 as a news-sharing service but didn't gain traction and ended up with Wales laying off several journalists it had hired. WikiTribune was launched off the back of a crowdfunding campaign.
Wales spoke with the Financial Times about the new project and the site's jarring proposition for consumers, or rather users, who expect social networks to be free. LinkedIn could be an exception here.

"The business model of social-media companies, of pure advertising, is problematic," Wales told the publication.
"It turns out the huge winner is low-quality content," he added.
Wales hopes WT:Social can attract 50 million or even half a billion users and points to the success of Netflix and Spotify in attracting people who are willing to pay for "meaningful" content.
Signing up is free, but WT:Social has established a wait-list that paying donors can bypass. So far, just 200 people have paid to skip the waiting list.
He doesn't expect the social network to be profitable but reckons it can be sustainable with its current barebones staff.
Wales didn't go down the crowdfunding route this time and says he wants to "keep a tight rein on the costs".
SEE: Most Americans can't recognize 2FA, HTTPS, or private browsing
Instead of the global news focus of WikiTribune, WT:Social aims to build smaller self-sustaining communities built around niche subjects.
And rather than hire moderators to monitor fake news as Facebook has, Wales' social network would rely on a community of users to enforce standards. Since all content on the platform can be edited or deleted by other users, he believes there's a good incentive for good behavior by users.
jimmy-wales1.jpg

Jimmy Wales: The business model of social-media companies, of pure advertising, is problematic.
Image: Joi Ito/Wikimedia Commons
 
WT:Social aims to build smaller self-sustaining communities built around niche subjects.
But why? That's what small little forums and pages do, and they barely get any wider views or make money. It's like everyone's forgotten that if you want to make a place for your interests free of moderator bullshit/censorship, make your own website.
 
Pay is bad enough, sub is worse, everybody knows how those costs stack up. (Also, holding your social history hostage to a subscription - great way to make people hate you over time.)

As WP has failed to remain neutral, and increasingly has become a progressive circle-jerk, the promise of this 'objective' system will only appeal to people who will then REEE until it is adjusted to fit their own political bias. At best this will be the HuffPost of social media.
 
Last edited:
Pay is bad enough, sub is worse, everybody knows how those costs stack up.

As WP has failed to remain neutral, and increasingly has become a progressive circle-jerk, the promise of this 'objective' system will only appeal to people who will then REEE until it is adjusted to fit their own political bias. At best this will be the HuffPost of social media.
all true. even the idea is fundamentally flawed. reddit is similarly splintered into a thousand subs, doesn't make it more objective. people just subscribe to the truth they want to hear.

but idk about you guys, I'm sort of excited to see what "niche communities" the turbo autists of Wikipedia create.
 
Last edited:
but idk about you guys, I'm sort of excited to see what sort of "niche communities" the turbo autists of Wikipedia create.
A steep entry fee will probably drive back a lot of the potential autism, and a lot of those autists have already migrated to Wikia/Fandom (which, without a good adblocker, is almost completely unusable).
 
Back