Dumb Shit on Wikipedia

vulgar said:
View attachment 2042434
Wikipedia is celebrating it’s 20th anniversary, and Wikimedia, one of the greatest public art databases, has changed it’s homepage to this.

Thousands of years worth of art and 100,000s entries exemplifying human creativity, and we have this.

God I hate the West
Click to expand...
Images representing generic "POC cultures" stuff next to an image of a kid drawing a smiley face? Based.
 
  • Winner
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Admiral Mantoid, From The Uncanny Valley and 2 others
Large said:
He's blue if he was green he would die badabadeebabada
Click to expand...
image(2).jpg

oh god oh fuck
 
  • Horrifying
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, awoo, Admiral Mantoid and 6 others

Wikigroaning - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Wikigroaning is a term brought to public attention in June 2007 describing "the art of highlighting Wikipedia's bias toward things that don't matter."[1]

The practitioner "think[s] up two similar topics, one being of genuine historical or social relevance, and the other being useless to everyone but a small coterie of fans," and then compares the length of their respective Wikipedia entries.[1][2] An example would be a comparison of Wikipedia's entry on English philosopher John Locke with that on the character "John Locke" from the TV series Lost. The article that brought the term to light was written by Jon Hendren,[3] writing under the name "DocEvil", as a feature on the website Something Awful entitled "The Art of Wikigroaning".[4] On 19 June 2007, a sequel article was published on Something Awful.[5][/sneed]
Click to expand...
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, awoo, Kabuki Actor and 9 others
Pickle Dick said:
It's April Fools day, lets see what funny Wikipedia did for today.

View attachment 2048883
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the "ate my balls" joke is stolen from an equally autistic webgroup from the 90s that made a bunch of webpages in this vein where the only joke was the character or person "eating their balls". Wikipedia out here with some real knee slappers.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: Elim Garak, Big Nasty, Daughter of Cernunnos and 5 others
Toolbox said:
I'm pretty sure the "ate my balls" joke is stolen from an equally autistic webgroup from the 90s that made a bunch of webpages in this vein where the only joke was the character or person "eating their balls". Wikipedia out here with some real knee slappers.
Click to expand...
It's from "Mr. T ate my balls."
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Big Nasty, frozenrunner and 4 others
Time to do some more WIKIGROANING then! Here's what I looked up today:

St. George of Floyd, Patron Saint of Fentanyl vs Harriet Tubman, Tubman beats his article by around 7000 words (for now). I admit defeat in that one.
Donald Trump's article is about 6000 words longer than Literally Hitler's, proving once and for all that Blumpf is worse than Hitler!
Kurt Cobain's article is roughly the same length as Beethoven's, the latter has him beat by about 100 words.
Lord Voldemort has a slightly longer article than Ioustinianos the Great, about 300 words.
 
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, From The Uncanny Valley, Corpun and 2 others
Lol

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lilipo25/Archive - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Basically this is some TERF who was brave/stupid enough to try and defend Wikipedo articles against the pedo trannies who write all the content.

Anyway i can't even be bothered to read all that shit, but essentially some degenerate baby fucker accused her of having like six sock puppets, which was completely false, but still expanded over like 10,000 words where it was like 'well maybe she MEATpuppeted' because someone who probably wasn't her linked some Wikipedo page or other on Twitter and then the trannies stopped shitting their diapers for a minute because there were like MULTIPLE terfs editing Wikipedo articles, even if only to add like a one line comment to the talk page and then fuck up the signature or something (so Lilipo25 corrected the fuck-up which is concrete proof she's a sockpuppet, because otherwise why would she edit someone's comment).

Anyway the same goatfucker ('newslinger') who filed that spurious 'investigation' then reported her to some other tranny janny committee for posting to her own talk page a vent against the pedos who tried to drive her off the site.

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

Apparently this violates an 'interaction ban', so she needed 'enforcement'

Discriminatory screed on user talk page, including the text "Nonbinary is made-up bullshit for people who desperately want to be able to say they're oppressed minorities when they aren't. Everyone on earth is either male or female (and if your only priority when it comes to women's rights is people with dicks but you still call yourself a feminist, you're almost certainly the former). Wikipedia may accommodate your need to feel special, but biological reality never will." For context, Lilipo25 was banned from interacting with Newimpartial on 28 February 2021. Newimpartial identifies as non-binary on their user page as of 21 February 2021, which Lilipo25 had previously acknowledged on 27 February 2021.

She was then permabanned from Wikipedo for writing

That comment has nothing to do with Newimpartial, who isn't the only person in the world to claim 'nonbinary' as a personality because they don't have one worth relying on. Now stop pinging me and leave me alone, Newslinger. Or ban me. Or delete my account or whatever, I don't give a shit.

Humans can't change sex and every human on earth is either male or female. Reality is less scary than you think.

Then she was banned from her talk page after already being permabanned from the rest of the site, for writing in response to :

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

"I don't care, although it's rather silly for one admin to place a second block for the same 'offense' that a different admin already placed one for. Sex in humans is binary and immutable and I won't pretend otherwise any more to satisfy Wikipedia's collective lie."

which was followed up with

"As you have continued with more of the same even after being blocked, I have revoked your talk page access. If you wish to appeal the block, you may do so by contacting WP:UTRS. "

It's like 'hey tranny faggots, you've banned her from fucking posting, she only responded saying "I DGAF " because you posted something on her page, it's not like she replaced it with an ASCII animated GOATSE; banning her from replying there just makes you look like the autistic tranny jannies we know you are.'
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: Elim Garak, Sicko Hunter, Daughter of Cernunnos and 6 others
trannyfucker said:
Anyway i can't even be bothered to read all that shit, but essentially some degenerate baby fucker accused her of having like six sock puppets, which was completely false, but still expanded over like 10,000 words where it was like 'well maybe she MEATpuppeted' because someone who probably wasn't her linked some Wikipedo page or other on Twitter and then the trannies stopped shitting their diapers for a minute because there were like MULTIPLE terfs editing Wikipedo articles, even if only to add like a one line comment to the talk page and then fuck up the signature or something (so Lilipo25 corrected the fuck-up which is concrete proof she's a sockpuppet, because otherwise why would she edit someone's comment)
Click to expand...

Wikipedia has long had spurious sockpuppet 'investigations' as a means of banning politically unpopular users. In most of the cases I looked at, there was no real evidence the 'sock' in question was the targeted user.
 
  • Informative
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Admiral Mantoid, From The Uncanny Valley and 3 others
BootlegPopeye said:
Wikipedia has long had spurious sockpuppet 'investigations' as a means of banning politically unpopular users. In most of the cases I looked at, there was no real evidence the 'sock' in question was the targeted user.
Click to expand...
It's an old forum moderator pastime to reference some obscure rule (read: make up an excuse) to permanently do away with a user he personally dislikes. Guilty until proven innocent of course.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Elim Garak, Admiral Mantoid, From The Uncanny Valley and 5 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back